Reply to TK. Chan

[Dr.Strangelove]

Strangelove wrote,
First, I was angry because your title heading seems reducing movie to
only a format of AV software. As I believe aesthetic aspects of film
shouldn't be discussed in an AV group, I think your title subtly implies
(or reduces) movie is a AV software in order to sustain your arguement.
So I asked you what your defination of
"movie".
Second, I dun want to futher this discussion, or debate, or despite,
becasue I dun understanding one important point by Andy, that this is an
unmoderated group.
I looked up my dictionary and found this word means "boundaryless", If
it carries the
same meaning as in my dict., I think our arguement is really
unnesassary. If it means something else please tell me.
Third, I never said you did not say anything in my last post that you
are against me "personally", please see my Chinese words(my last post),
all is based on reasoning, despite you agree with it or not. (except one
time you called "this humaning being", I critized your personal attack
on me)

Despite the meaning of "unmoderated"
What I argue and am afraid of is that once we accept film criticism here
on the ground that they relate to movie which is a format of AV
software, we would be deprived of the right and notion to criticise
those junk posts, like "anti-tse tin fung". These junkers
can also justify their posts on the same group as your, that is he a
singer, and relates to CD, a format of AV software. Then what can we
say?

i think you and I are on the same ground that we hope this is a ideal
place for HT fans, but we think differently on how to achieve this,
right?

Whether a frog is young, old, naive or innocent will see the same sky
when it is
sitting at the bottom of the well. Only when it has the strength to
leap out of
the well then it be able to claim the world.

I won't say anyone as a frog! the first lesson of my history of western
philosophy,
I was told the story of Socretic's story that:
He asked, "who is the most clever person in the world?"
THe god, "The one who knows he knows little!"

I know I dun know too much, but when I whenever I see something wrong (I
think), I can be claimed as to say nothing!

[TK Chan]

I am glad to see that the discussion is turning rational. I am not prepared to
answer your specific questions but would like to respond generally.

I and alot of local friends like to participate in this NG because we can
communicate better, in English or Chinese language, with the same culture and
understanding. There are of course other NGs of specific interest within the
context of audio and visual subjects but most if not all are based elsewhere in
the world. Chinese language is not understood there mostly. It would be
therefore good to have this NG as the local base for Hong Kongers. It would be
even better if we can attract the patronage of intellectual discussion as much
as possible.

We should continue to condemn junk mails vigorously because they are junks. This
include mails relating to actors and artists's conduct, behaviour and their
daily lives because they are of no concern to audio and visual subjects at all.
I think a wise person like you and like all other conscientious net friends well
understand the difference. Difference between what are actually audio and
visual related and what are beyond that context. If there are comments on the
artists' singing style, live concert vs CD, MD, DVD, LP or any other recording
format, I think there is no harm to tolerate such discussions because they come
within the meaning of rec - recreation; audio - sound effect and visual -
perception effect.

Likewise, discussion of the conduct or life style of actors should be condemned
but the actors performance and how this performance is translated in the act is
good for discussion here because we 'feel' and 'perceive' this throught its
visual and audio effect of the recording media, be they in film, tape, disc or
other formats. Films apart, we should also welcome discussion of other
entertainment programmes, such as my collection of LPs on cars, aircraft, marine
and landscape scenery. I remember last time when friends come to my house for
audition of my system, they all enjoyed these programmes as much as the movies.
There were discussions on the photography of the images, the colour, the
atmosphere and other aspects of the programme material. In short we were excited
by what was presented by the audio and visual effect of the
programme.

Through our frog's view of the sky from the bottom of the well, we formulate our
own definition on audio and visual subjects. (No intention of undermining
anyone's ego but purely an analogy). But a writer, a painter or artists of other
disciplines may have different meaning and interpretation of the same audio and
visual subjects. Why don't we accept their patronage to this NG because this
will enhance and extend our views, our understanding and appreciation of audio
and visual effect in a different perspective. Afterall, as I said before, it
would be better to have more of this 'fringe' discussion than those meaningless
'for sale' advertising messages.

Although Andy has called many times to stop the argument, however, I am glad
that the discussion has been frank and sincere and, in the end, helped us
understand more of the attitude of this NG.

TK Chan

[香港至NET超人]

係 hk.rec.audio-visual 看到很有見地的 "Dr.Strangelove" <d...@fan.com> 寫了:

>Strangelove wrote,
> First, I was angry because your title heading seems reducing movie to
>only a format of AV software. As I believe aesthetic aspects of film
>shouldn't be discussed in an AV group, I think your title subtly implies
>(or reduces) movie is a AV software in order to sustain your arguement.
>So I asked you what your defination of
>"movie".

I read through you two post and have some really strange feeling.
What is the problem of the AV software you mean? Does it carry size
or the seriousness of works being done on it or what..
At your understanding from my reading is, AV software is much more
low level in both artistical view or any kind of value than moive.
AV software to my meaning is a large set which include audio and
visual, software is the set that it is for playback and end-user
to get the means of audio-visual. Film, is a plastic base, chemical
coated recording media, some of them has magnetic coating and some
of them has chemical coating for audio parts. Mostly, movie is the
contiuous playback picture and sound in a as close as realtime system.
Generally, we have film movie, video movie, digital movie and
maybe newly developed virtual reality movie.
Nowadays, film movie are already a mix of technology. When production
take place, most of them using video camera to catch and playback
the pre-acts for fine adjustment, shooting with films when acting,
adding digital movie effects into the film after act, duplicate
films to more sets of film for threatre playback, digitize to
LD/VCD/QUICK-TIME/MPEG/REAL-VIDEO for varies purpose. I see no reason
why film movie can't group into AV software.

> Second, I dun want to futher this discussion, or debate, or despite,
>becasue I dun understanding one important point by Andy, that this is an
>unmoderated group.
>I looked up my dictionary and found this word means "boundaryless", If
>it carries the
>same meaning as in my dict., I think our arguement is really
>unnesassary. If it means something else please tell me.

I can tell what is unmoderated as I am a founder of some newsgroup.
First we need to know what is moderated. A moderated newsgroup is a
semi-open newsgroup. One or a group of system operator handle this
group by routing all the posting to sysop. Sysop will read through
the mail and see if it meet certain querries about the related NG.
Then divert into two set, meet all the requirement and put it into
newsgroup, doesn't meet the requirement and reject to post. The
unmoderated newsgroup is no sysop in charge of this group. User
can post anything that is related to the group. If one post is
fail to meet the requirements, anyone at this group can report to
the sysop in HKIX and let them kill or send warning if the post is
unappropriate.

>Despite the meaning of "unmoderated"
>What I argue and am afraid of is that once we accept film criticism here
>on the ground that they relate to movie which is a format of AV
>software, we would be deprived of the right and notion to criticise
>those junk posts, like "anti-tse tin fung". These junkers
>can also justify their posts on the same group as your, that is he a
>singer, and relates to CD, a format of AV software. Then what can we
>say?

So sorry to tell. Even if you don't accept anything about nothing,
junk mails/posts still happen from time to time. Something like
goverment set a lots of rule about speeding of car, but still people
going to break it. What should you do if some just say anti-singer
just beacuse the disc poorly made! There is nowhere in the world
don't have grey area. You may simply like photography group that
move to starzine, to a more control and healthy area.

> Whether a frog is young, old, naive or innocent will see the same sky
>when it is
> sitting at the bottom of the well. Only when it has the strength to
>leap out of
> the well then it be able to claim the world.

what do you mean?

> I won't say anyone as a frog! the first lesson of my history of western
>philosophy,
>I was told the story of Socretic's story that:
>He asked, "who is the most clever person in the world?"
>THe god, "The one who knows he knows little!"

That is god knows.

>I know I dun know too much, but when I whenever I see something wrong (I
>think), I can be claimed as to say nothing!

But you already spoke, you listed thousands word to the world.
What is the "say nothing" you mean?! Free speech is the most
important at here. If you don't support this idea, you need to
tell why and how it can be.

[Dr Strangelove]

香港至NET超人 wrote:
I read through you two post and have some really strange feeling.

> What is the problem of the AV software you mean? Does it carry size
> or the seriousness of works being done on it or what..
> At your understanding from my reading is, AV software is much more
> low level in both artistical view or any kind of value than moive.
> AV software to my meaning is a large set which include audio and
> visual, software is the set that it is for playback and end-user
> to get the means of audio-visual. Film, is a plastic base, chemical
> coated recording media, some of them has magnetic coating and some
> of them has chemical coating for audio parts. Mostly, movie is the
> contiuous playback picture and sound in a as close as realtime system.
> Generally, we have film movie, video movie, digital movie and
> maybe newly developed virtual reality movie.
> Nowadays, film movie are already a mix of technology. When production
> take place, most of them using video camera to catch and playback
> the pre-acts for fine adjustment, shooting with films when acting,
> adding digital movie effects into the film after act, duplicate
> films to more sets of film for threatre playback, digitize to
> LD/VCD/QUICK-TIME/MPEG/REAL-VIDEO for varies purpose. I see no reason
> why film movie can't group into AV software.
>

Strangelove wrote, 超人, you got my point very well! I really consider AV
software a lower
term comparing to "film", artistically. I regard film as a form of art, such as
music
and novel. Film is surely a kind of AV software, but it carries a broader meaning

because it is an art.

Let raise one example to make my point explicit. Music is an art, right!,
nowaday, we mostly listen to music via an AV software called CD.
So we are very likely to discuss CD stuff here. But as the name of this
newsgroup (Audio-visual, which I think not an term refers to artistic level, you
may not
agree) conveys to me, I think we should discuss only
the technical matter of CD here, sound quality, recording, and leave the artistic

matter as the innovative of the song , melody, the performance of the singer and
musicians,
and etc. to other more related group such as alt-music or rec.music).

CD is easier to explain because we have two term to distinguish CD from its
"source"
(I can't think of other term) "Music".

On the other hand, "film" or "movie" is a more troublesome term. Film refer both
to AV software ( CD ) and an art form (music). As I consider the term AV software

lower and not artistic, I do not agree to post Film criticism or music criticism
here.

Sure, you can consider AV software includes artistic stuff, I can convince you!
It becomes a subjective matter of point of view; I therefore want to stop this
discussion as I and you guys have made ourselves clear, right! But we can't
convince
each other. Because there is not a judge here to make the judgment, we had better

do what we think appropriate: I would not post film criticism here, and you guys
on other hand go on doing so, ok!

> I can tell what is unmoderated as I am a founder of some newsgroup.
> First we need to know what is moderated. A moderated newsgroup is a
> semi-open newsgroup. One or a group of system operator handle this
> group by routing all the posting to sysop. Sysop will read through
> the mail and see if it meet certain querries about the related NG.
> Then divert into two set, meet all the requirement and put it into
> newsgroup, doesn't meet the requirement and reject to post. The
> unmoderated newsgroup is no sysop in charge of this group. User
> can post anything that is related to the group. If one post is
> fail to meet the requirements, anyone at this group can report to
> the sysop in HKIX and let them kill or send warning if the post is
> unappropriate.
>

Thanks for telling me that!

> >Despite the meaning of "unmoderated"
> >What I argue and am afraid of is that once we accept film criticism here
> >on the ground that they relate to movie which is a format of AV
> >software, we would be deprived of the right and notion to criticise
> >those junk posts, like "anti-tse tin fung". These junkers
> >can also justify their posts on the same group as your, that is he a
> >singer, and relates to CD, a format of AV software. Then what can we
> >say?
> So sorry to tell. Even if you don't accept anything about nothing,
> junk mails/posts still happen from time to time. Something like
> goverment set a lots of rule about speeding of car, but still people
> going to break it. What should you do if some just say anti-singer
> just beacuse the disc poorly made! There is nowhere in the world
> don't have grey area. You may simply like photography group that
> move to starzine, to a more control and healthy area.

I insist my point here, because we can't condemn anyone to post such postsif we
can't provide a logical argument or theory to do so.

> > Whether a frog is young, old, naive or innocent will see the same sky
> >when it is
> > sitting at the bottom of the well. Only when it has the strength to
> >leap out of
> > the well then it be able to claim the world.
> what do you mean?
>
> > I won't say anyone as a frog! the first lesson of my history of western
> >philosophy,
> >I was told the story of Socretic's story that:
> >He asked, "who is the most clever person in the world?"
> >THe god, "The one who knows he knows little!"
> That is god knows.
>

> >I know I dun know too much, but whenever I see something wrong (I

> >think), I can be claimed as to say nothing!
> But you already spoke, you listed thousands word to the world.
> What is the "say nothing" you mean?! Free speech is the most
> important at here. If you don't support this idea, you need to
> tell why and how it can be.

I think there is a language misunderstanding here. My point is simple: When I see
some wrong, I can't help but to point it out!
and I think the matter we discuss here has nothing to do
free speech.. it is about the nature of this newsgroups should be!
(The whole world seems against my argument, but until now I still
convince it is right,, stubborn!)

[TK Chan]

Hi, Superman,

香港至NET超人 wrote:

> I read through you two post and have some really strange feeling.
> What is the problem of the AV software you mean? Does it carry size

> or the seriousness of works being done on it or what.. (the rest skipped)

If you would also read the threads on 'The Titanic highly recommended' and 'Is
movie a format of AV software', you'll be able to know the origin of these
subsequent mails.

To me, there is no distinction of higher or lower level of discussion. Art does
not necessarily to be rated a higher level than other form of activities. Art is
an abstract form of intellectual appreciation. Film (movie) doesn't
automatically qualifies itself to be an art only because it is made in motion
picture format. Film critics don't necessarily have to be associated with
artistic comments.

> So sorry to tell. Even if you don't accept anything about nothing,
> junk mails/posts still happen from time to time. Something like
> goverment set a lots of rule about speeding of car, but still people
> going to break it. What should you do if some just say anti-singer
> just beacuse the disc poorly made! There is nowhere in the world
> don't have grey area. You may simply like photography group that
> move to starzine, to a more control and healthy area.

Right you are. In the photography newsgroup where you and I are participants, we
promote an open forum. We not only discuss photographic equipment and technique,
we also discuss the feelings we get from the photos, like your June-4 parade
photo series, and we even discussed to some extent the political issues relating
to these photos. Sometimes, we introduce the style of some master photographers
and what we think of them.

In this newsgroup, I think we should pursue the same spirit of free speech.

>
> > Whether a frog is young, old, naive or innocent will see the same sky
> >when it is
> > sitting at the bottom of the well. Only when it has the strength to
> >leap out of
> > the well then it be able to claim the world.
> what do you mean?

What I mean is that one should not confined to his own understanding but should
assume an open minded attitude so as to boarden his view.

Thanks for your response.

TK Chan

[Tim]

I can't help to step in here as I see something serious wrong with your main
arguement.

If you believe movie making is an art, what about movie maded by Super 8
film instead of 35mm film. Is this also an art. If it is, what about movie
made on Super BetaMax for TV. Isn't that also an art? Then what about movie
made on DV .....

I think you have confused about the software and "art/ways of making the
software". It is true that this newsgroup is concentrated on the
technicality of the software instead of the artistic content. But I think
that is what T.K. is referring to when he started the thread. I see no
reason why we cannot discuss the technical merit/superiority of the analogue
35mm film in the same way that we can discuss the technical merit of master
tape for audio recording in Audio/HiFi discussion group.

Dr Strangelove wrote in message <34C0B124...@fan.com>...

[香港至NET超人]

On Sun, 18 Jan 1998 01:28:21 +0800, "Tim" <tyy...@hkstar.com> wrote:

>I can't help to step in here as I see something serious wrong with your main
>arguement.
>
>If you believe movie making is an art, what about movie maded by Super 8
>film instead of 35mm film. Is this also an art. If it is, what about movie
>made on Super BetaMax for TV. Isn't that also an art? Then what about movie
>made on DV .....

That is the point. In my world (I am a photography lover), there is no
one really take interest in the format or just its name. We care about
the quality stuff. Film, well it can be name as art, but it can also
be a commerical tools, or just a fun of anything. I see no reason why
we can't produce more artistical movie through a video camera or just
a see-U-see-me cam. Art is not the packaging, it is something inside.

>I think you have confused about the software and "art/ways of making the
>software". It is true that this newsgroup is concentrated on the
>technicality of the software instead of the artistic content. But I think
>that is what T.K. is referring to when he started the thread. I see no
>reason why we cannot discuss the technical merit/superiority of the analogue
>35mm film in the same way that we can discuss the technical merit of master
>tape for audio recording in Audio/HiFi discussion group.

That is so true. If this group is just for hardware bugs, I would
better leave and start a new newsgroup to fit who really want both
hardware and software.

[Dr Strangelove]

香港至NET超人 wrote:

> That is the point. In my world (I am a photography lover), there is no
> one really take interest in the format or just its name. We care about
> the quality stuff. Film, well it can be name as art, but it can also
> be a commerical tools, or just a fun of anything. I see no reason why
> we can't produce more artistical movie through a video camera or just
> a see-U-see-me cam. Art is not the packaging, it is something inside.

My protest of posting content criticism here doesn't mean I am not interested in
the content of AV stuff!
How many times do I need to clarify this simple point?????

> That is so true. If this group is just for hardware bugs, I would
> better leave and start a new newsgroup to fit who really want both
> hardware and software.

You dun need starting a new one, but go to rec.movie, rec.music,or alt-music!

[Dr Strangelove]

Tim wrote:

> I can't help to step in here as I see something serious wrong with your main
> arguement.
>
> If you believe movie making is an art, what about movie maded by Super 8
> film instead of 35mm film. Is this also an art. If it is, what about movie
> made on Super BetaMax for TV. Isn't that also an art? Then what about movie
> made on DV ....

I never said movie is only made by 35mm:movie in DV is movie!
movie in super 8mm is movie
etc.
but movie is an art, or entertainmnet, Dv and super 8 are AV softwares!

>
>
> I think you have confused about the software and "art/ways of making the
> software". It is true that this newsgroup is concentrated on the
> technicality of the software instead of the artistic content. But I think
> that is what T.K. is referring to when he started the thread. I see no
> reason why we cannot discuss the technical merit/superiority of the analogue
> 35mm film in the same way that we can discuss the technical merit of master
> tape for audio recording in Audio/HiFi discussion group.
>

I really hope have read my reasoning!

[香港至NET超人]

係 hk.rec.audio-visual 看到很有見地的 Dr Strangelove <d...@fan.com> 寫了:

>My protest of posting content criticism here doesn't mean I am not interested in
>the content of AV stuff!
>How many times do I need to clarify this simple point?????

Yes, I don't really know your point(s). Many of your mail is so
mixed. What I found in the posting is some collectly written
English and some ideas which is not well organized. I am not
a good English read or a puzzle player. Sorry, that is my
problem..

>You dun need starting a new one, but go to rec.movie, rec.music,or alt-music!

Then, what is the purpose your think of about the rec.av (that is
here)...

[香港至NET超人]

係 hk.rec.audio-visual 看到很有見地的 Dr Strangelove <d...@fan.com> 寫了:

>I never said movie is only made by 35mm:movie in DV is movie!

>movie in super 8mm is movie
>etc.
>but movie is an art, or entertainmnet, Dv and super 8 are AV softwares!

You named the major different. That is you named "movie" is an art
form which other DV/super8 is not. This is a very poor point in
concept. DV/super8 or whatever is just the media of carrying
people's work. Where the format affect the artistic level, I don't
think so. If you know my fan who is a really moive photographer
that made use of super8 camera produce lots of unbelieveable
movie. He is serious enough that he force Fujifilm to manufacture
Veliva and Provia 100 slide in super8 format which no one ever and
never again in Fujifilm history. The product of him has put into
35mm movie and project in front of millions of people..

my knowledge told me, format is not related to artistic level.

[香港至NET超人]

係 hk.rec.audio-visual 看到很有見地的 Dr Strangelove <d...@fan.com> 寫了:

>> That is so true. If this group is just for hardware bugs, I would

>> better leave and start a new newsgroup to fit who really want both
>> hardware and software.

>You dun need starting a new one, but go to rec.movie, rec.music,or alt-music!

請不要自大下去, 這裏的朋友們都討論得好開心,
大家也不介意所討論的內容. 唯獨你一人, 一開金口
就說三道四, 看似理論, 又說是業內工作者, 但沒有
common sense, 即與這裏的群眾沒有共通點, 反叫
別人搬家! 好大的口氣, 為何不是你搬去外國的AV組,
或台灣的, 或星網的看看你有沒有支持者. 我以足十
年TELE-COMM與及不下於八年HIFI的經驗打賭, 你
這些言論一樣不得要領. 再駁也冇謂, 找些志同道合
的再來討論吧, 再組識你所謂的COMMON SENSE吧!

.PS 記著, COMMON SENSE永遠都是人多讚同的言論.

[tamil.il...@gmail.com]

Tollywood, Kollywood, Bollywood Latest Movie - News, Gossips, Videos, Trailers, Reviews and much more @ iluvcinema.in (i love cinema, ilovecinema)


i love cinema, tollywood movies news, tollywood movies gossips, tollywood movies videos, tollywood movies trailers, tollywood movies reviews kollywood movies news, kollywood movies gossips, kollywood movies videos, kollywood movies trailers, kollywood movies reviews, bollywood movies news, bollywood movies gossips, bollywood movies videos, bollywood movies trailers, bollywood movies reviews, tollywood movie updates, kollywood movie updates, bollywood movie updates iluvcinema, i luv cinema, ilovecinema

On Thursday, January 15, 1998 1:30:00 PM UTC+5:30, Dr.Strangelove wrote:
> Strangelove wrote,
> First, I was angry because your title heading seems reducing movie to
> only a format of AV software. As I believe aesthetic aspects of film
> shouldn't be discussed in an AV group, I think your title subtly implies
> (or reduces) movie is a AV software in order to sustain your arguement.
> So I asked you what your defination of
> "movie".

> Second, I dun want to futher this discussion, or debate, or despite,
> becasue I dun understanding one important point by Andy, that this is an
> unmoderated group.
> I looked up my dictionary and found this word means "boundaryless", If
> it carries the
> same meaning as in my dict., I think our arguement is really
> unnesassary. If it means something else please tell me.

> Third, I never said you did not say anything in my last post that you
> are against me "personally", please see my Chinese words(my last post),
> all is based on reasoning, despite you agree with it or not. (except one
> time you called "this humaning being", I critized your personal attack
> on me)
>
>

> Despite the meaning of "unmoderated"
> What I argue and am afraid of is that once we accept film criticism here
> on the ground that they relate to movie which is a format of AV
> software, we would be deprived of the right and notion to criticise
> those junk posts, like "anti-tse tin fung". These junkers
> can also justify their posts on the same group as your, that is he a
> singer, and relates to CD, a format of AV software. Then what can we
> say?
>

> i think you and I are on the same ground that we hope this is a ideal
> place for HT fans, but we think differently on how to achieve this,
> right?
>

> Whether a frog is young, old, naive or innocent will see the same sky
> when it is
> sitting at the bottom of the well. Only when it has the strength to
> leap out of
> the well then it be able to claim the world.
>

> I won't say anyone as a frog! the first lesson of my history of western
> philosophy,
> I was told the story of Socretic's story that:
> He asked, "who is the most clever person in the world?"
> THe god, "The one who knows he knows little!"
>

> I know I dun know too much, but when I whenever I see something wrong (I