Put in video in and press play.
Noise fills the screen so you fast forward in the hope it was at the start of the tape - it never is.
Eject the tape to confirm your suspicion that the dick who gave it to you hadn't rewound it.
Tape goes back in. Press stop (essential to do this or it will automatically play, thus reducing the maximum rewind speed).
Press and hold rewind for a few seconds
Leave the room to do any number of lengthy tasks while the tape rewinds
Return in time to hear the tape rewind speed slow down
Walk up to the TV and hover over the play button in an attempt to divine when the movie as opposed to the tape begins
Fail at that
Watch trailers for films you love the look of as you skin up in preparation for the film, smug in the knowledge you had time to make a cup of tea and wash up as it rewound
The film is rarely great but she is often fit
Wednesday 30 September 2009
Saturday 26 September 2009
#VHSMovieClub: The Vmhs Code
Perhaps with the formation of this fledgling media history organization it is time to reveal a dangerous theory that was passed to me by a contact before he was 'retired' by the agency he espionaged against.
A hardly documented power struggle between the ratios 4:3 and 16:9 has existed since the invention of the first canvases and the demands of their purchasing artists, who for reasons unknown requested a certain length of canvas. The width was almost always the same, being constrained by the limit of the press that formed it (although there were variations between the maximum width of any particular press which led to certain canvas makers growing popular and in later years actually dictating the content and composition of the art - but more on this later).
It was in this period that two greatly opposed art fractions were formed; the 4:3ers and the 16:9ers - their names of course representing their canvas proportions (and because of the finite amount of width variations their size as well).
Throughout the ages the battle has raged; unseen yet experienced, irrelevant yet integral, furious and most certainly spurious. Nevertheless like the romanticized power struggles of New York mafia families there have been a few occurrences when it's boiled over into public awareness. Early Summer 1973 was one such time, when with the period later known as the 'Movie Formation Control Years' (or MFCY*) began.
The 'Movie Format Control' department was at the centre of a globo-political power struggle since the first VHS cassette was released in 1973. The movie was 'Soylent Green' starring Charlton Heston, so it was a huge coup for the Russians that their format (16:9) was used for the case that held the VHS cassette.
At the time Heston was an American icon in the making and so it was all the more impressive that the Soviet had turned him. For the US, Heston's face on a Soviet format was a huge insult. Revenge was sought and achieved with the release of CD-ROM cases in 4:3 and continues with the casing for blank DVD's today.
In contrast VHS packing had been consigned to the back shelves in charity shops, where it appears it is only regarded by top men. Top men. It maybe a sign of the rivalry subsiding with DVD movie packaging being an approximation of the two size formats.
As for the relationship of canvas makers to their clients (artists to the rest of us), it was a perverted period in art history when its very presence was realized through its function rather than its form. [Assuming you accept that in other all circumstances, 'Art can have no function other than as a conduit for the artist's thoughts'. This is not to be mistaken with the assertion that 'art can have no function other than as a conduit for the Artists thoughts].
4:3vhs16:9
This is the 'sign' that has alerted most of those I have talked to about this topic to the hidden messages left behind by representatives of 'the formats'. In this example you pronounce vhs as a word rather than an acronym so it sounds like versus. 4:3 being the US and 16:9 obviously translatable as the Soviets. Creepy right..?
4:316:9
With no other documentation on the actual beliefs of the 4:3ers or 19:9ers this link is the only documented reference: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=kEgnLpm06zQC&pg=PA193&lpg=PA193&dq=4:316:9&source=bl&ots=Re1ifXKLRC&sig=AZGCjqCIJBeKQ47iOEjqUZE_tCM&hl=en&ei=UeO9Sr6YI5rLjAfN8YhA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=4%3A316%3A9&f=false
*The MFCY were formally called CMYK but K was ejected after a failed attempt for complete control of the acronym and was replaced by F in a realignment which inevitably led to their intended meaning being lost. (CMYK has since been replaced by C,M,Y and K)
A hardly documented power struggle between the ratios 4:3 and 16:9 has existed since the invention of the first canvases and the demands of their purchasing artists, who for reasons unknown requested a certain length of canvas. The width was almost always the same, being constrained by the limit of the press that formed it (although there were variations between the maximum width of any particular press which led to certain canvas makers growing popular and in later years actually dictating the content and composition of the art - but more on this later).
It was in this period that two greatly opposed art fractions were formed; the 4:3ers and the 16:9ers - their names of course representing their canvas proportions (and because of the finite amount of width variations their size as well).
Throughout the ages the battle has raged; unseen yet experienced, irrelevant yet integral, furious and most certainly spurious. Nevertheless like the romanticized power struggles of New York mafia families there have been a few occurrences when it's boiled over into public awareness. Early Summer 1973 was one such time, when with the period later known as the 'Movie Formation Control Years' (or MFCY*) began.
The 'Movie Format Control' department was at the centre of a globo-political power struggle since the first VHS cassette was released in 1973. The movie was 'Soylent Green' starring Charlton Heston, so it was a huge coup for the Russians that their format (16:9) was used for the case that held the VHS cassette.
At the time Heston was an American icon in the making and so it was all the more impressive that the Soviet had turned him. For the US, Heston's face on a Soviet format was a huge insult. Revenge was sought and achieved with the release of CD-ROM cases in 4:3 and continues with the casing for blank DVD's today.
In contrast VHS packing had been consigned to the back shelves in charity shops, where it appears it is only regarded by top men. Top men. It maybe a sign of the rivalry subsiding with DVD movie packaging being an approximation of the two size formats.
As for the relationship of canvas makers to their clients (artists to the rest of us), it was a perverted period in art history when its very presence was realized through its function rather than its form. [Assuming you accept that in other all circumstances, 'Art can have no function other than as a conduit for the artist's thoughts'. This is not to be mistaken with the assertion that 'art can have no function other than as a conduit for the Artists thoughts].
4:3vhs16:9
This is the 'sign' that has alerted most of those I have talked to about this topic to the hidden messages left behind by representatives of 'the formats'. In this example you pronounce vhs as a word rather than an acronym so it sounds like versus. 4:3 being the US and 16:9 obviously translatable as the Soviets. Creepy right..?
4:316:9
With no other documentation on the actual beliefs of the 4:3ers or 19:9ers this link is the only documented reference: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=kEgnLpm06zQC&pg=PA193&lpg=PA193&dq=4:316:9&source=bl&ots=Re1ifXKLRC&sig=AZGCjqCIJBeKQ47iOEjqUZE_tCM&hl=en&ei=UeO9Sr6YI5rLjAfN8YhA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3#v=onepage&q=4%3A316%3A9&f=false
*The MFCY were formally called CMYK but K was ejected after a failed attempt for complete control of the acronym and was replaced by F in a realignment which inevitably led to their intended meaning being lost. (CMYK has since been replaced by C,M,Y and K)
Saturday 28 March 2009
Here are some things I made a few years ago.
Natasha Nezvanova's quote became inspiration for an image that depicted both practical and metaphoric suggestions. Practically, the Star Spangled Banner has horizontal lines that should be cut along to make bandages and the remaining small square folded for use as a sling. Metaphorically, the Star Spangled Banner is a negative representation of any nation with an aggressive foreign policy. From this I went on to creating more character based stuff.
Sunday 15 March 2009
Wembley Park: It’s no room for Elbow
Descending the steps from Wembley Park would present a daunting sight to any away fans.
The imposing active shrine to English football looms high, higher still the closer you get.
For the music fan the view is different. Cattled right once under the bridge, it gets less impressive.
Ahead is the Las Vegan styled mega church of the latter day super group
If outside it’s a church then inside it’s an airport, council office and cinema, all in one L-shaped corridor.
But none of these architectural assumptions are delivered.
In the arena proper I am the average age attendee.
To my left and ahead everyone is over fifty. Behind me and to the right are the under-ages.
I smelt three things that cemented the sad acknowledgment that this was not a seminal psychedelic set from the sixties.
Hotdogs, cough drops and perfume.
Even if he says, “I love you too” it’s nothing personal.
He can’t even see you and because of you I can’t even hear him.
Your photo won’t come out, it’s from a camera phone at twenty feet.
You don’t need the flash, it’s best to stop dancing first, check them on the way home – not now.
Elbow were outstanding but I don’t know what seeing a live band is for.
Am I hearing an enhanced rendition of their most recent album?
No. The crowd see to that.
Have I come to see the personalities behind the music?
No. My enjoyment is in placing myself within the song – seeing the artist from within a crowd only undermines this self-deception.
Do I need affirmation of my music preferences by joining an adoring mob?
Yes but I don’t necessarily want to meet that mob.
The imposing active shrine to English football looms high, higher still the closer you get.
For the music fan the view is different. Cattled right once under the bridge, it gets less impressive.
Ahead is the Las Vegan styled mega church of the latter day super group
If outside it’s a church then inside it’s an airport, council office and cinema, all in one L-shaped corridor.
But none of these architectural assumptions are delivered.
In the arena proper I am the average age attendee.
To my left and ahead everyone is over fifty. Behind me and to the right are the under-ages.
I smelt three things that cemented the sad acknowledgment that this was not a seminal psychedelic set from the sixties.
Hotdogs, cough drops and perfume.
Even if he says, “I love you too” it’s nothing personal.
He can’t even see you and because of you I can’t even hear him.
Your photo won’t come out, it’s from a camera phone at twenty feet.
You don’t need the flash, it’s best to stop dancing first, check them on the way home – not now.
Elbow were outstanding but I don’t know what seeing a live band is for.
Am I hearing an enhanced rendition of their most recent album?
No. The crowd see to that.
Have I come to see the personalities behind the music?
No. My enjoyment is in placing myself within the song – seeing the artist from within a crowd only undermines this self-deception.
Do I need affirmation of my music preferences by joining an adoring mob?
Yes but I don’t necessarily want to meet that mob.
Saturday 14 March 2009
Finsbury Park: The dead cat diaries
Scootering down Blackstock Road from Highbury to Finsbury Park can be like sliding along a waste-pipe,
from an affluent neighborhood to its outflow on the edge of a nearby slum.
Each morning the pavements of Finsbury Park are coated in a film of grease,
the waste-pipe outflow has manifest as fan's chicken and beer residue from the night before.
Big groups are safe. Big groups don't all know each other so big groups don't all care about each other.
Small groups aren't safe. Small groups all know each other so small groups all care about each other.
Big groups are Arsenal. Arsenal are safe.
Arsenhalalager. Football, chicken, beer.
Lisa and Phil saw a cat that turned out not to be asleep.
Flickr was not updated with the cute cat photograph but Twitter got one forty on the feline fatal
from an affluent neighborhood to its outflow on the edge of a nearby slum.
Each morning the pavements of Finsbury Park are coated in a film of grease,
the waste-pipe outflow has manifest as fan's chicken and beer residue from the night before.
Big groups are safe. Big groups don't all know each other so big groups don't all care about each other.
Small groups aren't safe. Small groups all know each other so small groups all care about each other.
Big groups are Arsenal. Arsenal are safe.
Arsenhalalager. Football, chicken, beer.
Lisa and Phil saw a cat that turned out not to be asleep.
Flickr was not updated with the cute cat photograph but Twitter got one forty on the feline fatal
Friday 13 March 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
