[Frameworks] Forbes editorial about Kodak

Matt Helme dcinema2134 at yahoo.com
Fri Oct 7 13:04:41 CDT 2011

I meant you could always make film.Not sure what would be involved in doing that.


From: Tim Halloran <televisual at hotmail.com>
To: dcinema2134 at yahoo.com
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2011 10:03 AM
Subject: RE: [Frameworks] Forbes editorial about Kodak

Interesting little videos, but what do they have to do with "making film?" 
When I saw your message I thought I was going to be linked to something about actually hand producing film stocks. Does anyone know of anybody who is doing this, or has thought of doing it?
I guess you meant "you could always make a film. No?

 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:17:20 -0700
From: dcinema2134 at yahoo.com
To: frameworks at jonasmekasfilms.com
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Forbes editorial about Kodak

I guess you could always make film?


 From: Pip Chodorov <frameworks at re-voir.com>
To: Experimental Film Discussion List <frameworks at jonasmekasfilms.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Frameworks] Forbes editorial about Kodak

These are my sentiments exactly, and I also use Eudora.
But let's see what happens - maybe film will surprise us and survive.
Let's have this discussion in five years or so when instead of 6-8 
companies making film perhaps there are only 2-3.

At 10:18 -0700 6/10/11, Aaron F. Ross wrote:
>It's OK, I always wear a flame-retardant vest while on the Internet.  ;)
>BTW, as I said before, I'm not a hater. I just think critically about
>technology. Cases in point: I don't have a smartphone. I still have
>my collection of vinyl records. And I'm still using the same email
>program, Eudora, that I used back in the 1990s during the first round
>of "Flameworks" posts that forced me off the list. And why do I cling
>to these old ways? Not because they're old, not because I resist
>change, but because I have evaluated my needs and decided that these
>older technologies are better for me. New is not necessarily good,
>and old is not necessarily good, either. But in the case of celluloid
>film, very soon it will be a moot point, because you won't be able to
>buy it for love or money. --

FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com

_______________________________________________ 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/20111007/52abd062/attachment.html 

More information about the FrameWorks mailing list