From: john porter (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Jul 02 2006 - 22:08:08 PDT
--- David Tetzlaff <email suppressed> wrote:
> I think Sam is poking gentle fun at the lack of
> knowledge some of the
> film-film purists seem to have about (historical)
> video formats.
His fun is wasted on me because I'm the first to admit
I lack knowledge.
> Standard professional videotape recorders circa 200
> Motels used two-inch tape (thus "50.8mm").
> I have never heard of a 16mm video format.
My interest is not in the video width, but that these
were theatrical films shot on video.
> Sometimes people who write
> entries for IMDB don't
> know what they're talking about.
Like "common usage" on Google?
> ... and almost all the references to 200 Motels on
> the web, authored by Zappa fans,
> refer to the work as a 'film' not a 'movie.'
That's how I'd refer to 200 Motels and T.A.M.I.,
because they were shown on film. They were films shot
on video. They're also movies (moving pictures).
John Porter, Toronto, Canada
http://www.super8porter.ca/
email suppressed
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.