Definitely good points. However, don't forget that any film stock can 
now be emulated, given good enough digital source material. As I said 
before, the moment that HDR sensors become affordable, then celluloid 
will be irrelevant. If you start with 20 stops of latitude in a 
32-bit floating point color space, you can push or pull it wherever 
you want and the end result will be indistinguishable from footage 
shot on the stock of your choice. --

Screen printing may not be obsolete, but optical printing effectively 
is. A few diehards who love the medium will keep celluloid on life 
support forever, but the handmade stocks I've seen (Impossible 
Project) can't possibly compete with the quality offered by 
deep-pocketed corporations. When it's no longer profitable for 
corporations to make film stock, then artists will have to make their 
own stock. And it won't be as good as it was in the golden age of celluloid. --

It *is* about artistry, and sentimentality. But the art depends in 
large measure on the movements of global economic forces. --

Ten years ago I taught a university video production class. None of 
the students back then had ever seen a piece of celluloid before. 
Film had already effectively receded into a specialist medium. My 
students were amazed that it was possible to hold the film up to the 
light and actually see an image! They were even more shocked when I 
showed them a Bolex and explained to them that it was over 30 years 
old and had never been serviced despite fairly heavy use. A windup, 
clockwork mechanism built to last puts disposable plastic and silicon 
to shame! Truly a triumph of engineering. --

Mind you, although I don't shoot in film myself, I have collaborated 
with a film artist and I have a great love of celluloid. I guess the 
"silver lining" here is that film will inevitably be used for the 
properties that are unique to that medium. There's a kind of purity 
to that thought. --


At 10/8/2011, you wrote:
>Aaron- I know this is a few months late, my apologies on the 
>tardiness, but I'd like to address what this thread was originally about...
>my problem with your original post is not that film will eventually 
>stop being produced (this may or may not happen, and Forbes should 
>certainly not be our proof - this issue is bigger than a "business 
>model")  it was that digital cameras have "surpassed" the quality of 
>most film stocks. The future of film will not be in its ability to 
>provide more information, but rather in its antiquity, its glow, its 
>physical and tangible characteristics, its craft, something that 
>only celluloid can provide. When you claim the inevitable demise of 
>film you sound like a best buy or radioshack salesman. As long as 
>this list exists, as long as there are films being made outside of 
>the "industry", celluloid will exist.
>I'd like to provide a different example: screenprinting. Why has 
>that not become obsolete? Can digital printers not produce the same 
>"result"... and yet artists have found a way to encorporate the 
>medium into contemporary printing practice.
>I am 22 years old, I was RAISED with digital and made the conscious 
>decision to work with celluloid. I fully understand the technology, 
>and for me, for the purposed of my art, I choose analog.
>It is an issue of artistry not industry.
>On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Melissa Parson 
><<>> wrote:
>hey sore eyes,
>  insults and negative facts about his art have nothing to do with 
> his arguments or assertions. try to argue the points and resist 
> your urge to lash out. critical analysis of art is important but 
> that's not what this thread was about...
>>On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Melissa 
>><<>> wrote:
>>The FU was pretty weak in my mind.  What was worse was slamming 
>>someones art work because you don't agree with their statements on 
>>technology changes etc...  How are we to create community where 
>>people feel safe to have heated discussions if we get abusive.  If 
>>we want more people to contribute we must think about this. Anger 
>>and passion are  fine but being mean just ain't cool....
>>Sent from my Samsung Replenish
>>But I did take a look at his "Art". My eyes still sore. Pass the Visine,
>>Sent from my Gatorade Replenish
>>FrameWorks mailing list
>FrameWorks mailing list
>_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing 


Aaron F. Ross
Digital Arts Guild

FrameWorks mailing list

Reply via email to