[Frameworks] Modern 16mm features, distributed on film

[40 Frames]

I would add Tim Wilkins to your list... Tim's been projecting Kodachrome
and BWR originals for
a number of years.

I made a few films on BWR, as it saved me from work printing or scanning
the film for editing, though
this was back when one could (wet-gate) print on 7361 to get a clean
projection print.

Alain



On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Herb Shellenberger <HerbS at ihphilly.org>
wrote:

>  *Let's just say $7000 USD to make two prints, adding up the above costs
> and having someone cut your neg...*
>
>
>
> In the face of this, Roger’s suggestion to project originals doesn’t sound
> too crazy. It obviously wouldn’t be a practice suitable for all kinds of
> work but might be interesting to infuse experimental cinema, separate from
> moving image performance, with a sense of immediacy, improvisation and
> impermanence via this practice.
>
>
>
> It’s a different topic but it would be also interesting to discuss artists
> who have projected originals in a cinema setting (Jack Smith, Nathaniel
> Dorsky and Jerome Hiler, Fred Camper’s *SN*, Luther Price), their varying
> motivations and the longevity—or lack thereof—of this work.
>
> *Herb Shellenberger*
> *Programs Office Manager*
> [image: cid:image001.jpg at 01CE5258.78B1F010]
> 3701 CHESTNUT STREET | PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104
> phone: 215.895.6575   |  fax: 215.895.6562
> email: herbs at ihphilly.org | web: www.ihousephilly.org
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* FrameWorks [mailto:frameworks-bounces at jonasmekasfilms.com] *On
> Behalf Of *40 Frames
> *Sent:* Sunday, July 20, 2014 6:44 PM
>
> *To:* Experimental Film Discussion List
> *Subject:* Re: [Frameworks] Modern 16mm features, distributed on film
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 1:08 PM, John Woods <jawoods01 at yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> Alain, while I'm primarily interested in experimental or artists films,
> I'd open up to mainstream films too. I'm more broadly interested in the
> state of 16mm film as an exhibition format and not necessarily
> experimental. If Spielberg decided to distribute his latest on 16mm, then
> that would count. I guess I'm biased in my thinking that a 16mm print
> nowadays is an indulgence for the creator and few mainstream filmmakers are
> going to convince their distributor to pick up the bill for the print.
>
>
>
>
>
> 70 minutes x 36ft/min = 2520 feet
>
>
>
> Optical Track .60/ft x 2520 = $1512 + shipping
>
>
>
> Answer Print 1.00/ft x 2520 = $2520 + shipping
>
>
>
> Release Print .70/ft x 2520 = $1764 + shipping
>
>
>
> Subtotal $5796
>
>
>
> Cut your own neg, or add the cost of that as well ($5 per cut). Let say
> 100 cuts for a nice round number multiplied by an
>
> A roll and B roll... $1000 + shipping. Neg cutting will get more expensive
> as black leader is becoming more expensive. One
>
> can A roll, and/or cut their own neg to save cost, but there's still going
> to be a cost to cutting neg given the supplies needed to cut neg.
>
>
>
> Let's just say $7000 USD to make two prints, adding up the above costs and
> having someone cut your neg...
>
>
>
> A common "art theater" rental rate in the US is $250 or a certain
> percentage of the door whichever is greater. Let's assume
>
> $250 is better than the percentage. Book 30 screenings and you've made
> $7500, covering your lab cost for making prints. That's assuming you didn't
> travel to any of these screenings... and assuming each theater agreed to
> pay the $250 rental + shipping (both ways)!
>
>
>
> The film coops and artist-run labs can bring some of these costs down...
> indeed it might be the only way one can consider going this route, but then
> you have the issue of 16mm projection....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That surf film sounds pretty interesting. A throwback to the days of
> Warren Miller touring his films. The ski/surf/skate genre is in away
> similar to experimental film. Its a niche audience of practitioners and the
> films are plot-less compositions of beautiful visuals.
>
>
>
>
>
> I met a guy (this was probably 20 years ago) who was shooting backcountry
> snowboard films on a Bolex in the British Columbia backcountry. His footage
> was very nice, though I've always had a difficult time with this style of
> making, as it's usually is a bunch of shots cut to music. I'd prefer an
> ambient/location track of some kind, even a non-sync constructed one. I
> always found these films (ski/snowboard/surf/skate) to be more akin to
> music videos than experimental films. But still, there are certainly some
> crossover/similarities, so I would agree with your comment above.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I know it was shot on 16mm, but is Jodie Mack's Dusty Stacks of Mom
> available on 16mm? Thats about 40 minutes.
>
>
>
>
>
> Pam asked the same question, perhaps Jodie can answer as I don't know.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Alain
>
>
>
>
> --
> 40 FRAMES
> Alain LeTourneau
> Pam Minty
>
> 40 FRAMES
> 5232 North Williams Avenue
> Portland, Oregon 97217
> USA
>
> +1 503 231 6548
> www.40frames.org
> www.16mmdirectory.org
> www.emptyquarterfilm.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>


-- 
40 FRAMES
Alain LeTourneau
Pam Minty

40 FRAMES
5232 North Williams Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97217
USA

+1 503 231 6548
www.40frames.org
www.16mmdirectory.org
www.emptyquarterfilm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/attachments/20140721/a708f10b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 4520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/attachments/20140721/a708f10b/attachment.jpg>