Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: I don't think they've got it quite right.

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » I don't think they've got it quite right. (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: I don't think they've got it quite right.

Ken Lackner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1907
From: Atlanta, GA, USA
Registered: Sep 2001

posted 06-16-2002 11:02 PM

OK, now I'm confused. Is that website a joke, or is it *supposed* to be serious? (Obviously the information is bad.)

| IP: Logged

John Moriarty
Film Handler

Posts: 50
From: Cambridge, UK
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 06-17-2002 02:38 AM

quote:
OK, now I'm confused. Is that website a joke, or is it *supposed* to be serious? (Obviously the information is bad.)

I've had a good poke around the site, and can't find anything that claims it is anything other than serious. Also, there are available a couple of software packages available for download, and I can't see why a these wuld be there if it were a joke. Also, for all the rubbish, there is some reasonably accurate info aswell, which doesn't make too much sense for a joke. So I am of the opinion that it is serious, but am open to counter arguments.

John

| IP: Logged

Stephen Furley
Film God

Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002

posted 06-17-2002 05:22 AM

I think, and hope, that it's a joke. I was fooled by the sound page, but some of the other material, e.g. the splicing pictures was just over the top, nobody could be *that* bad. The comment on the home page about having been checked by the BBC and being 100% accurate also gives it away, If he, or she, was being serious, but just hopelessly wrong, they wouldn't have made that comment.

They obviously know quite a bit about film, they are aware of the worm gear problems on the new type B+H projectors for example, most of what they deal with seems to be 16mm, and somewhere there is an example of a positive optical track, but on what appears to be a scan of a length of negative stock. Most people wouldn't have negative stock to scan.

My guess would be a serious amateur film maker, or collector, or possibly a film student.

If they are reading this, perhaps they should consider renaming their site www.film_done_wrong.com.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-17-2002 01:26 PM

He tries to explain those splice pictures by saying "The film is messy because I was experimenting." Well if that's the case, why not finish experimenting, and then take pictures using new film for examples? Sheesh.

I think it's a serious site, just one with a lot of misinformation.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.