🚀 go-pugleaf

hodges@news.NeoSoft.com (Eric Hodges) writes:

>James Howard (jbhoward@gibbs.oit.unc.edu) wrote:
>:  It's incredibly stupid.  The camera was designed as a toy, but
>: for some reason thousands of people cant get over the "gee whiz,
>: I can record video on an AUDIO tape???"   It's a novelty, and nothing
>: more.  

I had one. It was a neat toy. A few interesting things have been done with
it.  

>My partner is a video artist, and the "idiot" I think you are referring to
>is a very well respected artist  (who's name escapes me right now).  She
>didn't make a "pathetic documentary", she made a very powerful peice of
>artwork.  The toy camera windowboxes the image, reduces the resolution
>severely and records only in black and white.

These artists should go back to school, then, and learn a little more about
the tools they are using. 

I abandoned the PXL2000 because it limited me so severly in flexibility, that
everything I shot looked the same way. My input as an artist was minimal, 
restricted to subject matter. I had minimal control over lighting, contrast, 
framing, sound, etc. If I was a traditional artist, I would liken the PXL2000
to an Etch-a-Sketch.

Techno-Primativism is a good thing. I have my Super-8 camera. I love the 
creative latitude that it gives me. I can use higher speed film stocks to 
achieve that grainy "documentary" look that people equate with realism. 

>To acheive the same results through processing would cost more for 3
>hours of studio time than the price of the PixelVision!  THATS why many
>artists want them.

Artists that want to work in the experimental video medium have to become
technicians as well. I started using computers in video about 10 years ago. I
don't use computers for the traditional video uses; I do no 3D modeling. I use
my computer as a sort of digital filter -- it's rather easy for me to take 
video from my Hi8 camcorder and end up with something that looks like stuff
from a PXL2000. And my equipment is cheap; the computer and digitiser can be
had used for well under a $1000.00. 

>Also, a lot of artists use multiple playback in installations.  For $100,
>you not only get a camera but another playback source.  Buying or renting
>VCRs for installations can get VERY expensive, especially if your work has
>10 separate video signals.

That is pretty lame. You can buy new VHS playback only decks for $120.00. Image
quality is much better. You have the _option_ of degrading the signal, if you
so desire. 

>:  Guess there's a sucker born every minute.

>That's very insulting.

I don't intend to insult you or your partner, it's just that some of us work 
very hard at our craft. Stuff like the PXL2000 is a novelty -- I have seen too
much crap shot with it that was passed off as art. We both know that real art
transcends the medium to which it is bound....right?

--hal

--
     // 
~~~~//~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 \\//    hgm@unity.ncsu.edu  Disclaimer: You are imaging things again 
--\/----------------------------------------------------------------------------