Reply to Bill Nichols

Abstract

Our original statement encouraged the use of film-on-film (rather than film-onvideo) as the primary medium of classroom presentation of original motion picture films; it did not, as Nichols seems to imply, discourage the use of filmon-video as a secondary mode of presentation. Videotapes and laser discs can be quite successful pedagogic tools. It is only when educators are forced to choose between film-on-film and film-on-video that problems arise. Quite often that choice is uninformed; the first two-thirds of our statement (to which Nichols does not refer) details several of the differences between film and video and is designed to inform educators so that they can more readily make that choice; the statement to administrators is designed to suggest ways in which those of us who choose to use film-on-film can make a pedagogical case for it. What is the in whose face our statement flies? Nichols, as a former department chair, must certainly be aware that the realities of university budgets are neither hard nor fast, but always subject to negotiation and political pressure. To accept a nonexistent or inadequate rental budget as an economic reality is to deny that economic reality can be changed. If your university has allocated $10,000 to 15,000 to install a video projection system in a screening room, but refuses to provide a rental budget because it has funds for capital improvement but none for operating expenses, is that an economic reality or a state of affairs that needs to be, at least, discussed if not renegotiated? The fact that this state-of-the-art video projection system is incapable of producing an image equivalent to Super-8 (not to mention 16mm) film should be a factor in this discussion. Nichols suggests that video projection technology will eventually improve; we sincerely hope that it does, but why should we accept a downgrade in the quality of classroom presentation? (By the way, Nichols suggests that video can produce sound superior to that provided by 16mm prints. Perhaps it can for home viewers, who have hooked their video players up to their stereo systems, but how can video projection result in improved sound in the classroom? The sound system that it relies on is the same as that available for 16mm projection, relying upon the same amplifiers, wiring system, and speakers.) The economics of the situation are, moreover, not quite as clear-cut as Nichols has suggested. If, indeed, it is more economical these days to rent or buy videotapes/discs than movies and to install video projection systems, the