Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question
Dear Ekrem, I rented and showed Shutter Interface to my students last fall, and will do so again in a few months. In preparation, I talked to some folks who have also taught the film (hi Jeanne Liotta!) and went looking through all the Sharits writings I could find for any reference to the difference between gallery and theater versions, but found very little on this. I have the same rationale - he made the two-projector version and it remains rentable, so I rent it and show it. It's a super-accessible work. A couple of things - the written instructions you get from Film Coop inside the film can are ambiguous. Use version A. Version B mentions the effect of making the two frames slowly merge on screen - but gives no instructions for how to accomplish this. (Maybe someone here can clarify?) And the soundtrack needs some extra care, since each projector will have its own sound. So if you are running it through the house PA, you will need to configure the channels so it's stereo sound, not mono. I couldn't access the house PA for this, so my solution was to bring two powered monitor speakers of my own, and run 1/4 out from each Eiki projector to its corresponding speaker. More work, but as you know that's what you're getting into with expanded cinema anyway. By the way, the sound happens only on the black frames. If you know that as you're watching the work, it's even cooler. It's a fantastic projection experience and we all loved it. I left some room behind the projectors for the students to go and observe the color frames as they moved through the projector. If you can see that as you observe the screen, there's no more spectacular lesson in the nature of film projection (that is, the conversion of still frames to motion). Andy Ditzler www.filmlove.org www.johnq.org Graduate Institute of the Liberal Arts, Emory University On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Ekrem Serdar ekremser...@gmail.com wrote: Heyya Framers, So based on his notes, it seems that many of Paul Sharits' multi-projector pieces (Shutter Interface, Dream Displacement, among others) are primarily conceived as installations. However, as many of you know, there are also theatrical versions of these films, using two projectors instead of four, and foregoing other alterations to the machines. (There's a bunch of these over at Filmmakers Coop.) The question: Would you say its correct that Sharits made these black box versions to simply give the films an expanded (hoho) life, especially during a time period when film projection was a rarer sight in galleries? So not necessarily the intended version, but a different (and obviously more accessible) way to showcase his ideas. I hear this might be a sensitive subject; but the way I see it is that he did make the prints, and as long as it's presented appropriately no problem. We'll be showing the two-projector version of Shutter Interface in Austin next week (which i had the pleasure of seeing at Hallwalls some years back), so just preparing. -- ekrem serdar austin, tx ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question
Andy – you slowly move the left projector to the right and the right projector to the left until the frames align as one. Peter (Perth) From: Andy Ditzler a...@andyditzler.commailto:a...@andyditzler.com Reply-To: Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.commailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com To: Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.commailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question Dear Ekrem, I rented and showed Shutter Interface to my students last fall, and will do so again in a few months. In preparation, I talked to some folks who have also taught the film (hi Jeanne Liotta!) and went looking through all the Sharits writings I could find for any reference to the difference between gallery and theater versions, but found very little on this. I have the same rationale - he made the two-projector version and it remains rentable, so I rent it and show it. It's a super-accessible work. A couple of things - the written instructions you get from Film Coop inside the film can are ambiguous. Use version A. Version B mentions the effect of making the two frames slowly merge on screen - but gives no instructions for how to accomplish this. (Maybe someone here can clarify?) And the soundtrack needs some extra care, since each projector will have its own sound. So if you are running it through the house PA, you will need to configure the channels so it's stereo sound, not mono. I couldn't access the house PA for this, so my solution was to bring two powered monitor speakers of my own, and run 1/4 out from each Eiki projector to its corresponding speaker. More work, but as you know that's what you're getting into with expanded cinema anyway. By the way, the sound happens only on the black frames. If you know that as you're watching the work, it's even cooler. It's a fantastic projection experience and we all loved it. I left some room behind the projectors for the students to go and observe the color frames as they moved through the projector. If you can see that as you observe the screen, there's no more spectacular lesson in the nature of film projection (that is, the conversion of still frames to motion). Andy Ditzler www.filmlove.orghttp://www.filmlove.org www.johnq.orghttp://www.johnq.org Graduate Institute of the Liberal Arts, Emory University On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Ekrem Serdar ekremser...@gmail.commailto:ekremser...@gmail.com wrote: Heyya Framers, So based on his notes, it seems that many of Paul Sharits' multi-projector pieces (Shutter Interface, Dream Displacement, among others) are primarily conceived as installations. However, as many of you know, there are also theatrical versions of these films, using two projectors instead of four, and foregoing other alterations to the machines. (There's a bunch of these over at Filmmakers Coop.) The question: Would you say its correct that Sharits made these black box versions to simply give the films an expanded (hoho) life, especially during a time period when film projection was a rarer sight in galleries? So not necessarily the intended version, but a different (and obviously more accessible) way to showcase his ideas. I hear this might be a sensitive subject; but the way I see it is that he did make the prints, and as long as it's presented appropriately no problem. We'll be showing the two-projector version of Shutter Interface in Austin next week (which i had the pleasure of seeing at Hallwalls some years back), so just preparing. -- ekrem serdar austin, tx ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.commailto:FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question
What Peter said. Version B was accomplished at a screening here with relatively little difficulty a few years ago just by tilting the projectors, which were running in the middle of the stadium seating, rather than from the booth, to the side a little at timed intervals. The instructions give the times. I believe the keystoning was pretty minor, but that's not the point anyway. Seeing the gradually overlapping images was really interesting, especially when they were fully on top of each other. Peter Kubelka's Monument Film screening at NYFF 2012 also used the technique of projecting flicker films directly on top of each other. As to Ekrem's original question, I don't have anything to add unfortunately. Herb Shellenberger Programs Office Manager [cid:image001.jpg@01CE5258.78B1F010] 3701 CHESTNUT STREET | PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 phone: 215.895.6575 | fax: 215.895.6562 email: he...@ihphilly.orgmailto:he...@ihphilly.org | web: www.ihousephilly.orghttp://www.ihousephilly.org/ From: FrameWorks [mailto:frameworks-boun...@jonasmekasfilms.com] On Behalf Of Peter Mudie Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 9:56 AM To: Experimental Film Discussion List Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question Andy - you slowly move the left projector to the right and the right projector to the left until the frames align as one. Peter (Perth) From: Andy Ditzler a...@andyditzler.commailto:a...@andyditzler.com Reply-To: Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.commailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com To: Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.commailto:frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question Dear Ekrem, I rented and showed Shutter Interface to my students last fall, and will do so again in a few months. In preparation, I talked to some folks who have also taught the film (hi Jeanne Liotta!) and went looking through all the Sharits writings I could find for any reference to the difference between gallery and theater versions, but found very little on this. I have the same rationale - he made the two-projector version and it remains rentable, so I rent it and show it. It's a super-accessible work. A couple of things - the written instructions you get from Film Coop inside the film can are ambiguous. Use version A. Version B mentions the effect of making the two frames slowly merge on screen - but gives no instructions for how to accomplish this. (Maybe someone here can clarify?) And the soundtrack needs some extra care, since each projector will have its own sound. So if you are running it through the house PA, you will need to configure the channels so it's stereo sound, not mono. I couldn't access the house PA for this, so my solution was to bring two powered monitor speakers of my own, and run 1/4 out from each Eiki projector to its corresponding speaker. More work, but as you know that's what you're getting into with expanded cinema anyway. By the way, the sound happens only on the black frames. If you know that as you're watching the work, it's even cooler. It's a fantastic projection experience and we all loved it. I left some room behind the projectors for the students to go and observe the color frames as they moved through the projector. If you can see that as you observe the screen, there's no more spectacular lesson in the nature of film projection (that is, the conversion of still frames to motion). Andy Ditzler www.filmlove.orghttp://www.filmlove.org www.johnq.orghttp://www.johnq.org Graduate Institute of the Liberal Arts, Emory University On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Ekrem Serdar ekremser...@gmail.commailto:ekremser...@gmail.com wrote: Heyya Framers, So based on his notes, it seems that many of Paul Sharits' multi-projector pieces (Shutter Interface, Dream Displacement, among others) are primarily conceived as installations. However, as many of you know, there are also theatrical versions of these films, using two projectors instead of four, and foregoing other alterations to the machines. (There's a bunch of these over at Filmmakers Coop.) The question: Would you say its correct that Sharits made these black box versions to simply give the films an expanded (hoho) life, especially during a time period when film projection was a rarer sight in galleries? So not necessarily the intended version, but a different (and obviously more accessible) way to showcase his ideas. I hear this might be a sensitive subject; but the way I see it is that he did make the prints, and as long as it's presented appropriately no problem. We'll be showing the two-projector version of Shutter Interface in Austin next week (which i had the pleasure of seeing at Hallwalls some years back), so just preparing. -- ekrem serdar austin, tx ___ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.commailto:FrameWorks
Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question
Thanks, Peter and Herb, for these clarifications. Looking back at Sharits' instructions, the only confusing thing is he asks the projectionist to follow a separate diagram of how to project Version B, and this diagram is not included. But I agree that you can work out how to do Version B from his verbal description, albeit with some keystoning. Andy Andy Ditzler www.filmlove.org www.johnq.org Graduate Institute of the Liberal Arts, Emory University On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Herb Shellenberger he...@ihphilly.orgwrote: What Peter said. Version B was accomplished at a screening here with relatively little difficulty a few years ago just by tilting the projectors, which were running in the middle of the stadium seating, rather than from the booth, to the side a little at timed intervals. The instructions give the times. I believe the keystoning was pretty minor, but that's not the point anyway. Seeing the gradually overlapping images was really interesting, especially when they were fully on top of each other. Peter Kubelka's Monument Film screening at NYFF 2012 also used the technique of projecting flicker films directly on top of each other. As to Ekrem's original question, I don't have anything to add unfortunately. *Herb Shellenberger* *Programs Office Manager* [image: cid:image001.jpg@01CE5258.78B1F010] 3701 CHESTNUT STREET | PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 phone: 215.895.6575 | fax: 215.895.6562 email: he...@ihphilly.org | web: www.ihousephilly.org *From:* FrameWorks [mailto:frameworks-boun...@jonasmekasfilms.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Mudie *Sent:* Tuesday, April 01, 2014 9:56 AM *To:* Experimental Film Discussion List *Subject:* Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question Andy - you slowly move the left projector to the right and the right projector to the left until the frames align as one. Peter (Perth) *From: *Andy Ditzler a...@andyditzler.com *Reply-To: *Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com *To: *Experimental Film Discussion List frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com *Subject: *Re: [Frameworks] Paul Sharits multi-projection question Dear Ekrem, I rented and showed Shutter Interface to my students last fall, and will do so again in a few months. In preparation, I talked to some folks who have also taught the film (hi Jeanne Liotta!) and went looking through all the Sharits writings I could find for any reference to the difference between gallery and theater versions, but found very little on this. I have the same rationale - he made the two-projector version and it remains rentable, so I rent it and show it. It's a super-accessible work. A couple of things - the written instructions you get from Film Coop inside the film can are ambiguous. Use version A. Version B mentions the effect of making the two frames slowly merge on screen - but gives no instructions for how to accomplish this. (Maybe someone here can clarify?) And the soundtrack needs some extra care, since each projector will have its own sound. So if you are running it through the house PA, you will need to configure the channels so it's stereo sound, not mono. I couldn't access the house PA for this, so my solution was to bring two powered monitor speakers of my own, and run 1/4 out from each Eiki projector to its corresponding speaker. More work, but as you know that's what you're getting into with expanded cinema anyway. By the way, the sound happens only on the black frames. If you know that as you're watching the work, it's even cooler. It's a fantastic projection experience and we all loved it. I left some room behind the projectors for the students to go and observe the color frames as they moved through the projector. If you can see that as you observe the screen, there's no more spectacular lesson in the nature of film projection (that is, the conversion of still frames to motion). Andy Ditzler www.filmlove.org www.johnq.org Graduate Institute of the Liberal Arts, Emory University On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Ekrem Serdar ekremser...@gmail.com wrote: Heyya Framers, So based on his notes, it seems that many of Paul Sharits' multi-projector pieces (Shutter Interface, Dream Displacement, among others) are primarily conceived as installations. However, as many of you know, there are also theatrical versions of these films, using two projectors instead of four, and foregoing other alterations to the machines. (There's a bunch of these over at Filmmakers Coop.) The question: Would you say its correct that Sharits made these black box versions to simply give the films an expanded (hoho) life, especially during a time period when film projection was a rarer sight in galleries? So not necessarily the intended version, but a different (and obviously more accessible) way to showcase his ideas. I hear this might be a sensitive subject; but the way I see it is that he did
