Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: How long will the image of film as an icon survive?

This is topic How long will the image of film as an icon survive? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006335

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-08-2011, 01:42 AM:

What I mean is, when graphic artist, Madison Ave., industry people themselves want to convey the idea of anything related to movies graphicly, they almost incorporate the universally familiar image of film, with sprocket holes, frame lines, sound track (sometimes) and the usually rounded corners (which we haven't used for many years).

So what are they going to do when film is gone and a younger generation have never laid its collective eyes of a piece of film? Would it make sense to continually to use that icon in ads and in displays? Or has it become so ingrained in our DNA that it would take a millenium to loose its instantanious recognition? Like 20th Century Fox. Will they ever change it to 21st Centure Fox? There was a question in the months before 2000 if they would change it; I for one am glad that they didn't.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 01-08-2011, 01:48 AM:

1-0-1-0-1-0

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 01-08-2011, 02:23 AM:

I believe it will last longer that any of us currently alive and posting on these forums. I'm glad Fox kept its name and logo. It use to make me proud when I hit the screen with it (which included the CinemaScope trademark at the time).

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 01-08-2011, 08:03 AM:

Since most of the ads I have seen where film is the implied image, the agency takes new video images and introduces jumps and MANY scratches to the image. The implication is that you can only tell it is film if you see gross imperfections.

I am especially disturbed by the light struck effects. Oh, yes, those punched out numbers that were on the tails of some 8mm and 16mm consumer processed movie films really add to the effect!

The agencies don't like film or respect it, they just poke fun at it. That is what the "film look" has become.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 01-08-2011, 08:11 AM:

I think I heard that someone else trademarked 21st century fox. Louis

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-08-2011, 08:20 AM:

Probably as long as the skipping or scratched record is used by sound guys [Wink]

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 01-08-2011, 08:41 AM:

It will last as long as indies with digi-cams continue to call themselves "filmmakers."

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 01-08-2011, 10:28 AM:

The graphics people will just jump to other images used as icons. Motion picture cameras, studio lights, theater marquees, etc.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-08-2011, 08:41 PM:

Since most people already think we just run DVDs or something similar, and it's been that way for at least 20 years, I think the image of a piece of film will be around for quite a while still.

I also vote NOT in favor of Fox ever changing its name. Not all names need to be "current" to be good. 21st Century Fox just doesn't look or sound right. If they did anything I would expect them to drop the whole "century" thing and just become "Fox Entertainment" or something.

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 01-09-2011, 02:20 PM:

quote: Kenneth Wuepper
....I am especially disturbed by the light struck effects. Oh, yes, those punched out numbers that were on the tails of some 8mm and 16mm consumer processed movie films really add to the effect!

The agencies don't like film or respect it, they just poke fun at it. That is what the "film look" has become.

Indeed.

Another effect used in the new "Star Trek" was the annoying lens flare. WAAAY overused throughout the entire movie. I hope it doesn't become a trend.