[Frameworks] Analog and digital

[Amanda Christie]

i am late to the discussion here... just a quick note to add my few  
cents.

A)  when I think analog and digital, the first thing that comes to  
mind is that analog = analagous ...  and that an analog process is  
like a straight or curved line whereas a digital process is like a  
series of steps.  (imagine a fantastic drawing or diagram of each  
here).  I won't explain anymore , because others have done so much  
more eloquently already in the preceding discussion.

B).  FLICK!  FLICK HARRISON!   what an amazing reply... I love it!  I  
read the whole thread and I think your response sums it up nicely.  I  
know that in "frameworks-digital-e-communication-land" sometimes our  
exchanges have been on the more contentious side... but you often post  
great things, and I usually only reply to the things that incite  
contestation... and I want to make sure to reply to the things that  
make me go "YEAH!" as well.  so ... "YEAH!"   and I always enjoyed our  
in-person discussions back in Vancouver... and yeah... I just wanted  
to quickly post and say that I enjoy your frameworks posts too... even  
though often my responses only get typed in moments of "HEY WAIT A  
MINUTE!"   rather than in moments of  "YEAH!"  ... so needless to  
say... this is a moment of "YEAH!"

which seems to relate to many other threads I read tonight (I had over  
400 emails to catch up on).... that seems to be a trend among many of  
us on the list...

C) (on frameworks listserv itself... notsomuch on digital vs analog)
I assume (and probably I shouldn't assume anything) that many of us  
have lots on the go, and read what we can, when we can, from the  
list.... and occasionally something strikes us and we write "HEY WAIT  
A MINUTE!!!!"   and often it comes late at night after marking too  
many essays or drinking too much whiskey... and it seems good and  
coherent at the time.... then someone else on the list reads it a few  
hours later in a different state of mind and then they write... "HEY  
WAIT A MINUTE"  .... to something we didn't even intend after grading  
all those papers and drinking all that whiskey... and before we know  
it, there is a whole new thread on feminist films shot on discontinued  
kodak stocks processed in coffee and transferred to video and  
projected on 3D DLP projectors with 3 blade shutters and it goes on  
for days... and oh my god!  (wait... where was I?).... oh yes....    
this listserv.  I think it is amazing!  I think we sometimes take it  
for granted.  We get annoyed with threads that we aren't interested  
in.  We sometimes respond flippantly or perhaps carelessly to things  
that excite our passions in certain states of mind. And amazing  
discussions result from the places we least expect.   (when I say  
"We"  I don't necessarily mean "ALL" of us... but I know that "I" do  
this... and I think can I safely say that I have observed some of you  
do it too.).  And I think it is wonderful, in the fact that incredible  
discussions wind up resulting from the most unlikely places (this  
thread is not one of them... but I am on a tangent here... and it  
feels like a good one... so I'm gonna run with it).... (where was I?)   
oh yes!  Frameworks... the listserv... the other thing... the  
archive.... many of us write these comments and responses in various  
states of mind... knee jerk reactions and passionate replies...  
sometimes forgetting... that it all gets archived.... every one liner  
sarcastic response... every snippy come-back... every jab... every  
dig... every deep philosophical question... every technical chemical  
formula... every list of films and authors to look into... it gets  
archived.... so on one hand... we (c)should perhaps be more cautions  
and conscientious before putting keystroke to screen (i am writing  
this as much for myself as for anyone else)... but at the same time...  
i think it is a marvelous and wonderful thing that all of these  
spontaneous emotional reactions and replies get archived for however  
long the harddrives will store these digital (non-analog) bits of  
data... for the researchers and historians to come.  it is  
simultaneously frightening and incredibly beautiful!

(i am on a train right now, and have had a bit to drink while reading  
through 400 frameworks messages... so it's a bit of an overload...  
hence that last bit... but yeah... i mean... YEAH!)

adc



Amanda Dawn Christie
--------------------------------
506-871-2062
www.amandadawnchristie.ca
amanda at amandadawnchristie.ca
_______________________________



On 27-Aug-11, at 10:12 PM, Flick Harrison wrote:

> As for the retroactivity of defining film as analog, I'd say, if the  
> word "digital" is a late arrival to film theory, you might consider  
> that counting on your hands (the original digital system) is pretty  
> old, even by the standards of the oldies around frameworks...
>
> I'd call film analog because each grain is exposed to a  light of  
> varying colour and brightness, for any amount of time, focused by  
> any amount, then processed with more or less chemicals and time, all  
> of which are analog variables.  The placement of grain on a frame is  
> also random and analog.
>
> [I'd also say exposure to light is an electronic process ;-)  .   
> Marshal McLuhan called the light bulb the simplest electronic medium.]
>
> In digital imaging, by contrast, each pixel is given a numeric value  
> (like 0-255 in red, 0-255 in green, and 0-255 in blue) and assigned  
> a place on a set grid.
>
> Some people might call film digital anyway, because each frame is  
> discrete, that is, they are consistent units which are assembled to  
> make the movie.
>
> I've had long discussions with digital theorists who insist the  
> alphabet is a digital medium, in that it's the set range of discrete  
> values which are assembled in a sequential pattern in order to  
> transmit information.
>
>
> ;-)
>