|
Author
|
Topic: Cutting film for “art” projects
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Sarnowski
Junior
Posts: 14
From: Portage, IN, USA
Registered: Jan 2018
|
posted June 26, 2018 06:04 PM
I know, about two weeks ago I sold him a set of titles from the Monkees TV show that are LPP. Because he lives in Canada, and eBay won’t combine shipping for the global shipping program, he asked me a couple days ago if I would sell him a few more with direct shipping. Now that I know what he most likely plans to do with them, I don’t want to sell him anything else.
Obviously it’s his right to do whatever he wants with his property but Its also my right not to sell things to him. That’s why I wanted to get a few more perspectives on the matter. Money is money, and bills need to be paid, but I actually get a pit in my stomach when I look at these. Plus I recently just inherited all of these films from my late father, and he hated even throwing away 4ft of film that was warped with VS, so I know he wouldn’t have approve of treating films this way.
Thanks for the feedback and i’d Love to hear anymore opinions that are out there.
Brian Sarnowski
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven Haines
Junior
Posts: 8
From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Registered: Nov 2017
|
posted June 27, 2018 03:46 PM
This concept of selling individual frames from films reminds me of this listing for the T2: The Ride 70mm film that I recently came across. The seller seems to suggest that the $30,000 asking price is quite the bargain when you add-up all the frames: "The Back to the Future ride at Universal also used a 70mm film to produce the visual effects during the ride. There is a pair of BTTF 70mm frame cells (TWO CELLS/FRAMES) for sale (online) which is commanding $149.00 for just TWO CELLS as there were only a handful created."
I came to film through an interest in preservation, so "first do no harm" is always in mind when handling films. With that being said, I also consider myself an artist, so, if a particular material speaks to someone, then I support responsibly indulging those whims. But there's a smart way to do it with film. For instance, I will confess to trashing 16mm film stock as raw material for sculptural creations, though said film was too-far-gone with vinegar syndrome to be of much other use.
Moreover, I think this same dilemma applies for anyone working with film for found footage collages. There's always the tricky debate of damaging the film by splicing it up, or keeping it fully intact. But perhaps the full film does not meet with the artist's vision. Perhaps only a single shot or scene is appropriate. I certainly struggle with this when assembling some of my more hodgepodge-style screenings. I’ve got plenty of films in my collection that are probably one of a kind or the best quality versions in existence, or that are camera originals (and definitely unique.) Those ones will never meet an unnecessary splicer blade while in my care. And then I’ve got other films that are common and that are compromised in terms of condition. With such cases, the shackles of my preservationist mindset are more likely to be undone.
Personally, seeing the films cut up for some of the pieces in the MiniCinemaShop does make me reflexively wince. But I guess what it comes down to is a matter of before and after value. Not monetary value but value in terms of enjoyment and interest. Has the artist somehow transformed the original material in a positive way to make it more interesting? I think the purpose of the films has been fundamentally changed, since they are no longer useful as cinema (for being projected to an audience.) Now they are materials intended to be peeped by individual viewers. Some might call that tragic, I suppose. But now the films are freed from the constraints of the apparatus (the projector.) So I’m not sure what to think of the MiniCinemaShop lightboxes. I’m skeptical, and I feel like perhaps films could be chosen a bit more wisely, but who am I to judge?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brian Sarnowski
Junior
Posts: 14
From: Portage, IN, USA
Registered: Jan 2018
|
posted June 27, 2018 07:46 PM
Part of the reason I came here with this is because there will never be a right answer everyone agrees to, so I thank everyone for chiming in.
There are people out there who probably cringe that eight track tapes are being tossed in the dumpster. We all can make exceptions for the things we are passionate about and I understand when you say these items are now “freed from the constrains of a projector”, however I don’t agree with it. Most of the items are of a musical variety. The soundtrack, along with these images, laying dormant for the rest of eternity is just as upsetting to me. I can listen to any Beatles song on Spotify but it will never be the same as taking a vinyl album from my dad’s collection and playing it. The same way you can go to the bookstore and find a hardcover collection of every early Marvel comic but I’ll never be the same as having an actual Spiderman number one.
But you’re right, if this gentleman was doing nothing but taking film I have no interest in, or that has zero value to even the beginning collector, perhaps I never would’ve brought the subject up. Loved ones are inheriting collections all the time that they have no idea what to do with. I love that there is a site like eBay that people can say I have no idea what this is..... is it worth anything to anyone? But, are these items being saved from a dumpster and hung on the wall, no. They’re being purchased and knowingly destroyed and I think that’s my biggest issue.
Just picture two people wanting this film, one a man with a projector and another with scissors. It’s almost laughable the comparison you can make to King Solomon.
Brian Sarnowski
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
