> The reason why this is true is that television is an
> inductive medium.  This means that telelvsion is better if one
> uses many close-ups to explain a story rather than the deductive
> approach where there are a series of shots progressing from a long
> shot to a close-up.  It is an intimate medium also because the screen
> is relatively small and it generally reaches us in our homes which,
> in the farthest sense, is an intimate place.
 
I feel there are three reasons why this *appears* to be true: the
low resolution of current TV screens; the unnatural aspect ratio
of current TV screens; and the method of screen refreshment.  I
believe that much of current TV programming styles result from
attempts to cope with these limitations ... aspects perceived
(inaccurately) as "conversational" and "intimate" are simply
attempts to compensate for the inherent weakness of the medium.
What results is a transmission with one or two huge "spikes" of
interest and information, but tremendous "death valleys" of
low-definition, uninteresting boredom. The only way to cope with
these effects (or more accurately, lack of effects) is to
increase close-ups and cuts ... compensate for lack of
information by denying a complete image at every possible turn
... MTV, for example.
 
I believe we are soon due for a enlightening demonstration of
their effects ... in the form of high definition broadcast
standards and LCD-based screen technology.  High resolution and a
"theatrical" aspect ratio INVITE closer inspection of images,
since there is more detail to be absorbed and enjoyed. LCD-based
screen technology may help eliminate the current method of screen
freshment ... i.e. in half-frames.  Current TV's demonstrably
hypnotic effect may result from the way in which our brains
attempt to piece together a "reality" out of these shattered and
rapid images. (To demonstrate this effect, invite friends for a
party, wait until the conversation gets really good, then turn
boob-tube ON and observe.)
 
One of the future alternatives being discussed for screen
transmission is a kind of "FM" transmission of images, where the
DIFFERENCE between each frame is transmitted. I bet that viewing
this type of transmission on a high-performance LCD screen (see
the new Toshiba $9,000 portable PC ... it has a mind-boggling LCD
screen!!) will have very different physiological and
psychological effects on viewers.
 
These new technological approaches are developing just as we
border on the era of interactive multi-media video, and on the
transnationalization of markets and industry. I bet that in 20
years, our current TV will look as corny and stilted as do early
silent films today. Advanced thinkers are already designing a
planetary computer network in which you can be logged on anywhere
and get your own "desktop" ... which could include live
television, automatically excerpted from current transmissions.
 
So much for the contemporary concept of "home!"
 
Malcolm Dean <[log in to unmask]>
author, Censored! Only in Canada (the first complete history of
film censorship in the backward northern colonies)