film vs video

[Peter B. High]

Many thanks to Markus (and to Joseph Murphy) for compiling the lists of differences between 
celluloid and video.  Markus' run-down works as a very good, "totte-oki"  check-list for deeper 
discussion. As I read it through, however, a few interesting anomalies came to mind. One is that 
in certain circumstances the  (non-privileged) medium of video can actually provide greater 
visual clarity than a 16 mm. print. I've often experienced this when attending the monthly 
"Natsukashiki Katsudo Shashin"  shows  presented here in Nagoya by Waka Koji, the 74 year old 
katsuben. He uses his own private collection of 16 and even 35 mm priints, many of which are so 
tatterered, grainy or washed out as to be hard to "read," visually. In the case of films I'd 
already seen  on video, I found myself deperately trying to superimpose the recalled video images 
in order to make sense of what I was seeing on the silver screen. It was much like the time I 
visited the Doge's Palace in Venice. I followed the crowds through dusky  corridors and stopped 
before  shadowed niches trying to descry a glimmer of the the celebrated "Venician Fire" said to 
emanate from the old masters hung there.  Here and there one could make out a stray hand or the 
rounded cheek of some obscure figure, but little more. I then noticed that several of my fellow 
tourists were scrutinizing postcards of the same painting and, with the advantage  of this 
special "knowledge," explicating to their companions the elusive images of the original.  I 
remember peering furtively over shoulders at one of the cards and, comparing it with the dark 
mystery within the frame, exclaiming along with the rest, "Yes! I SEE!" 
I suppose I'm glad to have been exposed to the "presence" of those originals. But it was the 
authenticity of the environment, rather than the impact of the works themselves, which remains in 
mind . Similarly, it is the reasonably "authentic" environment of Waka Koji's  film showings, in 
the presence of a genuine benshi and a host of elderly (and all-too-often uproariously chatty) 
movie fans, along with his infamously balky projection equipment and eternally splintering films,
which makes the experience worth-while...I suppose.

I think we must step beyond the "film vs video" bifurcation to appreciate the the situation. At 
the same time, I don't think Markus is correct in setting aside the "authenticity" issue so 
lightly as he does. Certainly in terms of modern wide-screen features put on video, we do have 
the problem of clipping, which surely does make the video version less "authentic" (or, do we 
have to find a completely different term for this phenomenon here?). The difference in 
resolution, too, can influence the aesthetic impact made by a film-on-video.
Still, the reality of the situation is that for the serious viewer of old and/or rarely shown 
films, video serves functions which have yet to put on the list. First is the obvious fact that 
many, many old films have re-emerged (on video) as presences in our liberal arts/cultural 
curriculum, much as the emergence of the paperback in the fifties revolutionized te scope of 
literature teaching. Equally important is the elucidatory function provided by video--based on 
the fact we can stop, freeze-frame, slow down or rewind the film at will. As all film teachers 
know, we can dub a certain scene for classroom use and set it in a new contextx--sometimes by 
juxtaposing it with a scene from an entirely different film--much as we do by quoting passages 
from different works of literature.
With the emergence of video stores, film companies have made available video editions of most of 
their theatrical releases, suggesting that we are now in the age of film-PLUS-video...indeed, 
much film production is nowadays influenced from the inception by an awareness that the work will 
reach the public via BOTH media, almost simultaneously.  This too, I think, should be added to 
the list.

Finally, I have one request for Markus. In your posting you says, "I make sure my students are 
cognizant of the differencesbetween media and the larger issues at stake. I make this part of the 
class." I, for one, would be very interested to hear how you do this. Could you briefly outline 
how you do this?

Peter B. High
Nagoya University