CompuServe Messages

Paul: >Well, that's the advantage of having a fertile period that expires at 9:30pm — you always get to watch Unsolved Mysteries. <LOL>< ROFL! Unfortunately, my wife is *frowning* at me big-time…oops… 😉 >Many times, tho, it's just those instances that push the technology forward. It seems that an important factor in creating momentum is when the technoid finally asks, "why would anyone want to do that?" This is when technology really accellerates into innovation. < And I wouldn't argue that point–Lord knows, Thomas' ideas have gotten me thinking time and again… >If there was one improvement I could universally make to every camcorder it would be 'the zoom operates only when the camera is in Standby'. POOF! The quality of home video just took a giant leap. Everyone makes this mistake tho.< It's a thought, I'll grant you…<g> As for everybody making that mistake at first–sure they do, that's how you learn NOT to… >CNN will run audio which is different from the video which is different from the keyed text. MTV frequently experiments with audio that is unrelated to the video. Unusual, but perhaps forward-thinking.< Yet it has to have *some* relation to the video–even as counterpoint– or the point doesn't get across. I feel that's *very* important… Of course, that may just be my narrative compulsion… (An art filmmaker friend of mine once referred to me as a "Spielbergian narrative overdeterminist"…) >She said, "…did you get the feeling that much of this movies' plot was left on the cutting-room floor? So many sub-plots were developed to dead-ends." But in film; that's not fatal because films seldom have just 'a' point.< Depends on the type of film–or video. I'm not saying that there isn't a place for EXOTICA as well as for, oh, JURRASIC PARK in film or video–they just have different intentions. And different audiences… >Films don't really just convey something like "Love conquers your deepest fears, or The Price of Greed can be your Life." But your average TV program does. In video, you can't just tell a story, you *must* make a point. An essence of Star Trek that doesn't quite translate to feature film.< I can't quite agree w/you there, Paul–I don't think either film or video are that cut&dried. Or maybe we're just discussing different semantics–I meant "point" not as in "moral", but "point" as in "a reason to have taken time out of your life to have watched this". Put that way, the "point" can simply be it entertained you… >Yeah, tho I like it when a videographer at least *tries* to manipulate me — even if the device doesn't work. Better to have tried and failed.< Oh, I *don't* if the film/videomaker fails. I feel it's a sign that person/those people aren't in control of what they're saying, or don't really believe it themselves. But again, that's a question of taste… >But after you've sat through a couple of my yawners you'd think 30 minutes of a writhing solarized woman looks rather fresh.< Again, I disagree–but that could also be because I've sat through *too many* 30 minuteses of writhing solarized women (or men) to find it fresh. Besides, what you're doing *does* have a point (as in "a reason to watch this") to its intended audience (I'm assuming you do special occasion videos)–the family and friends of the party in whose honor the entertainment is being given. It's not a point that would translate outside of its limited circle, admittedly, but there it's not intended to… OTOH, if you did a video w/the same level of audience appeal as a special occasion video but intended it for the world at large, it wouldn't have the same value… Best, Tim