Lots of very good ideas floating around in the comments of this blog. Fuel for my fire; the proof of this is that Mrs. C and I have been spending some very productive time in the edit bay, putting theory to practice; turning footage into films! To all of you who pre-ordered Damon and Hunter: For the Love, your wait is nearly over, and I think this “mental group grope” that has been going on here and elsewhere in the blogosphere has helped to make it a better, tighter film.
It’s also spun off a few other ideas that I want to address in upcoming posts. I’ve just come in from mowing the lawn (my long ideas come while mowing, my short ideas while in the shower), and I want to get these down before they flitter off, and hopefully the brain trust will start rolling them around in their heads.
The form factor used for distribution is not the same as the process of creation. Not all form factors are equal, not all processes are equivalent. (Consider the difference between the artists Shakespeare, Stan Lee, and Tony Comstock.)
While all artists must take into account the form factor that will be used to distribute their work, different processes are more or less governed by financial considerations. In this respect, film production (shooting) is very unlike writing/drawing a comic book. With the rapid development of digital post production tools, editing can now be very much like writing/drawing a comic book. (For the purpose of selling us computers and cameras, Sony, Apple, etc have done a fantastic job of very deliberately confusing one with the other.)
There’s a romantic notion that artists are uninterested or unaffected by concerns about money or the financial success of their work. When I was in school a woman that was getting her masters in art history wrote a very nice paper comparing the mythologies of Michelangelo and Vincent Van Gogh. Michelengelo was one of the richest men in renaissance Italy; Van Gogh was supported by his brother.
Further rumination is required, and fortunately there’s the whole other side of the house that needs to be mowed. More soon.
-TC
This entry was posted
on Thursday, July 7th, 2005 at 1:21 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 8th, 2005 at 8:39 am
I’m completely in favour of tighter.
July 10th, 2005 at 4:49 am
I wonder if Shakepeare mowed his own lawn? It could explain his many successes.
July 24th, 2005 at 11:29 pm
Hi there,
I am an Erotic artist, please check out my site http://www.zeppellina.blogspot.com/
I am in favour of artists making money!
This bizarre notion that artists are at their happiest when they are starving in a garrett is a myth!
Van Goch, of course, to a certain extent, chose to live that way, while Michaelangelo worked hard for a living because he had to.
Most of us do not have obliging souls who are prepared to support their strange artistic relatives!
Especially if those strange artistic relatives are at their happiest doing Erotic Art!!!