SCREEN-L Archives

July 1995, Week 2

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Dave Trautman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 12 Jul 1995 11:04:10 U
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (111 lines)
Subject:   Video from Film
 
Mike Frank;
I've been reading with interest some of the exchanges regarding the use of
video in film study.
I cannot recall who asked the original question but I felt I must address it
with you directly.
In July 10 Screen-L you finished with:
"my only concern is whether it is a better representation of THE SAME THING,
or whether the thing being represented, the signified itself, is somehow
changed in some significant way by the translation to video.
that is the issue that i believe remains unresolved."
 
This is an area which I have been examining very closely for the past couple
of decades. I have avoided entering the online exchange because I felt that
there were many issues that need airing and felt I would only be clouding
things by adding my two-bits.
 
I believe that film study should also include media study. That is, it
should include an examination of the effects of various environments created
by media and technology as being significant to the experience of the
messages or communication experience.
Inadvertently the availability of videocassettes to film study has allowed
for a broadening of the scope of study material but has also had the effect
of completely transformed the viewing experience. Where once 16mm and 35mm
prints were screened in the appropriate venue before, we now lament that
economics dictate we narrow our study to the content of the film by way of a
transcription to videotape.
If film study is only about the content of the film and not about the
watching, social effects, and political aftermath of film experiences then
there is little lost in the translation to videocassette viewing.
If the study of film examines the environment, politics, social issues, and
prevailing myths of the time a film played in theaters, then it is important
to immerse the student in that environment (however displaced in time and
style) for which the original viewing was intended. Stories and reports
about the reactions of audiences to various pivotal films seem as important
to the study of film as any of the stories told with the camera itself.
Where I believe the least understood impact of viewing videotape to the
process of studying film lay is in the processing of information by the
individual experiencing the transmission. Seen in the context of
milliseconds of conscious thought, film is a momentary flash of image which
requires the brain to dwell on the "impression" long enough to maintain
closure between frames and establish the illusion of a continuous moving
image. In that same time frame video asks the brain to trace an electron
beam across the surface of the display and construct the image out of a
mosaic of dots, allowing less time to dwell on the "impression" that the
image forms. The significance of this difference is easily overlooked when
the metaphors for each of the technologies use similar words. Video frames
are completely different from film frames. Video "bandwidth" is completely
unlike film "resolution" but they are both determining the clarity of the
"images".
So, I hope this goes some distance toward explaining how the person
experiencing the environment created by the interlaced scanning electron tube
will understand a film differently than a person experiencing the rapid slide
show environment created by motion picture projection. Both will agree on
the content but will never share the context of the intended viewing
experience.
 
In addition to this rather psycho-neural difference is the subtle effect of
projections being "light on" something and video being "light through" which
is addressed somewhat informally in Jerry Mander's "Four Arguments for the
Elimination of Television" as well as other texts.
George Lucas became concerned about "light through" when he saw what happened
to the travelling matte animations in his Star Wars films when they were
"scanned" to video for broadcast. What was hidden by projection was clearly
visible by TV. This has strong implications for the aesthetics of film in
all areas under the control of the filmmakers.
 
Some in the discussion have obliquely addressed the concern for the reduced
impact of the viewing experience with respect to the temporal aspects of
films. A motion picture is meant to be experienced as a continuous
projection uninterrupted and with seamless reel changes.
For analysis of film content this is problematic as it requires repeated
viewings in order to retain the elements being examined. With videotape the
freeze, replay, and scanning through sections are where the editorial control
of the filmmaker is passed on to the viewer and the effect of this on the
viewer has been to trivialize the importance of the editorial decisions being
made by the storytellers. Pekinpah's (sp?) use of slow motion to emphasize
the moment of death has been a subject of solemn debate in film study since I
was young. Would a slow motion analysis of any battle scene in Star Wars
give proper emphasis to the original intent of the scenes or would it
completely trivialize what is going on there?
 
Because books are an individualized linear experience operating as a
visualizing exercise for the mind they cannot compare adequately to the
collective viewing experience of a motion picture. In the selective terms of
comparing content they can find a shared set of metaphors which I believe is
the essence of the "text" discussion. But, I dare to emphasize, we reduce
the meaning of the film experience by analyzing it in strictly content terms
as well as by translating the images into another medium.
 
Teachers of film study must be aware of these aspects of media effects in
order to instill the meaning of film in their classes. I cannot recall who
originated the phrase "Talking about dance is like singing about
architecture", but it is instructive to remember this when choosing which
presentation environment to use for specific aspects of film study. We must
be sure that we are not "talking about dance".
 
[log in to unmask]
TV Producer
Faculty of Education
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
 
PS. Upon re-reading I change my mind about simply sending this to you and
have decided to ship it to Screen-L as well.
 
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2