I stand corrected. My experience is that of a documentarist where these
effects do not arise. Makes me think it's a lazy way of working compared to
the feature film sound recordists I watched at work many years ago who took
great pains and much initiative to hide their microphones within the set in
positions which would not be seen by the camera.
I'm also reminded of Walter Bejamin's well-known and beautiful observation
about the illusionary nature of cinema, that 'the equipment-free aspect of
reality [becomes] the height of artifice; the sight of immediate reality has
become an orchid in the land of technology'. Which means there's a
difference, of course, between technical accidents and the deliberate
inclusion of the offending prosthesis.
Michael Chanan
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Fair [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 23 April 2006 19:04
Subject: Re: FILM-PHILOSOPHY boom in view
Hi all,
Nigel is right, often the boom in view is the product of incorrect
projection, ask any projectionist who worked before the multiplexes or
anyone who ever ran a student film society in the "old days"
peace
alan
A. Fair
IDS
Before acting on this email or opening any attachments you should read the
Manchester Metropolitan University's email disclaimer available on its
website http://www.mmu.ac.uk/emaildisclaimer
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are
replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to:
[log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|