[Frameworks] 16fps 16mm projectors?

[Sasha Janerus]

Warhol wasn't sufficiently concerned with the technical side of things to
warrant a claim that he "intended" the films to run 16 as opposed to 18.
Warhol would have been interested in the creative misuse of the apparatus,
and in the footage being submitted to and deformed by norms enforced by
mass-production and standardization. The screen test *raisonné* lists
running times for both speeds--see the chapter on "Cataloguing and
Methodology" for a discussion.

The only reason I can think of for using 16fps would be to get some slight
flicker in the image, a spectral effect that by my lights makes for an
ideal presentation. But then you get into the question of number of shutter
blades.

I've checked with the Warhol Foundation as to what consumer projectors he
used. They were very gracious, but not especially helpful. W owned numerous
projectors, and would likely have used whatever was at hand--or several at
once, as in the EPI.

If you're still committed painstaking historical accuracy, Lary 7 projected
a couple of Warhol shorts at 16 fairly recently at Judson Church. I'd get
in touch with him about projectors, or with Bruce Jenkins or Claire Henry
at the Warhol Film Project for more info on the films.


On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Scott Stark <sstark at hi-beam.net> wrote:

> Thanks to all for the excellent suggestions and information. It is in fact *Sleep
> *that we'll be showing in Austin, TX in October; I'm not hopeful that
> I'll be able to find two functioning 16fps projectors locally, but as
> someone told me this morning privately, most 16fps projectors just had
> rheostat controls that were not particularly accurate, and in fact many
> 18fps projectors probably don't run at that exact speed anyway. (MOMA also
> noted that we could show it at 18fps.)
>
> Anecdotally, we recently had a successful two-projector screening of The
> Chelsea Girls in Austin. Prior to the screening, I got an email from
> someone encouraging me to instead use four projectors, as it would cut the
> screening time in half. Always good to get these things over with quickly,
> I say!
>
> best,
> Scott
>
> At 09:31 PM 8/3/2015, Steve Polta wrote:
>
> In 2001 San Francisco Cinematheque projected Andy Warhol's *Sleep*, which
> is six hours (360 minutes) at 16fps. We started the show at midnight,
> expected it to end at 6am. We ran it at 18fps and the show got out at
> 5:30am (and in fact I just did the math and I think the difference over
> that time is closer to 45 minutes somehow). So that's a good cumulative
> difference but probably "minimal" (to quote David Sherman quoting David
> Gerstein) difference moment-to-moment in viewing.
>
> 18 (or 16)fps vs 24 fps is obviously a very big difference and there is
> always the (possibly apocryphal) story of Stan Brakhage viewing *Sleep *at
> 24fps and declaring it a farse, then at 16fps and declaring it a
> masterpiece. Not that Brakhage's word is unquestionable but this would make
> a huge difference in many of these films. As I'm sure most of us know...
>
> Steve Polta
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Scott Dorsey <kludge at panix.com> wrote:
> The B&H filmosound in a box projectors (the 300 series) have universal
> motors with mechanical governors, which can be adjusted for a variety of
> speeds.  If set according to the manual the silent speed is 16 fps, but
> if no maintenance has been done it could be anything.  They are truly
> among the best projectors made, aside from the narrow barrel which severely
> limits your lens selection.
>
> That said, I doubt the difference between 16 and 18 fps would be that
> dramatic on screen.
> --scott
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>
> _______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list
> FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/pipermail/frameworks/attachments/20150804/151474f0/attachment.html>