Hello. I’d like to talk about something close to my heart.
I suppose you’re reading this post on a laptop or smartphone,
and I’m willing to bet you haven’t owned this equipment for 10 years. It’s widely
understood that, for a few reasons, our digital devices are throwaway tools. Incompatibility,
expensive repair, and new technology are a few of many things that lead to
machine obsolescence. Someone just yesterday explained to me why a 2006
computer wasn’t working, saying, ‘it’s old’. And I’d like to give a shout-out to my already
passé 1-year-old mini-DV HD camcorder: I love you, but none of the three cords
you came with are compatible with my new computer.
The concept of ‘throwaway’
technology didn’t always indicate that some more useful technology came along
as a replacement, and didn’t imply a cash investment. It also didn’t mean that you
were engaged in an arms race with your friends for the more pristine piece of
machinery (although your dream in 1982 may have been to own a Sony Betacam
camera).
At one point I imagine someone said, “Lets make a video
medium for the people. Cameras will be cheap, and so will tapes, players, and
dubbers. It will be practical, accessible and universal, with low maintenance
costs, a substantial recording capacity, and the quality will be horrible but
at least it’ll be unique in its simplicity.” Not to mention, this analogue
video medium sustained its inexpensiveness and (above all) universal
operability for over 30 years. Let’s talk about VHS.
What other medium has a more 'throwaway' reputation? Ryan and I were archiving camera-original elements of a film we had never heard of, labelled "Art Beat". Thinking we had found a lost Kartemquin film (and excited to talk about it here), Ryan went searching for an edited master or commercial copy of the film, only to find one VHS with the same label, containing 4 episodes of 'Friends' and 2 episodes of 'Frasier'.
Was this VHS at one point Kartemquin's only edited master? I doubt it- but for the time being it was my only chance at seeing the film, and more useful to someone as a home recording of primetime television.
I opened a box of 40+ VHS tapes the other day while archiving and my
brain flipped like a pancake. It’s a pain to see so many VHS tapes in one box…
the feeling is unlike opening a box of Beta-SP tapes, which are expensive and
signify movie elements of importance. A pile of VHS tapes in an archive is
probably going to be a bunch of tests and dubs to help editors with sound synching and
timing.
But what I love about VHS is its contradictory “cheapness”
and usability. While archivist Lyra sat in her corner, arm-deep in rotting work
print trims, and a folder of mysterious zip drives with little labeling awaited
my attention, I looked through that box of nice clean VHS tapes, confident
they’d play in our machines even though they were 20 years old. What a nice
medium, I thought. Perhaps VHS is misunderstood. Perhaps it is the last form of
recordable media that will hold its data and maintain its universal playability
and quality over the generations. Perhaps VHS is that holy grail of film
storage filmmakers all dream of...
And then, vindication!:
Here at Kartemquin, the editors were digitizing some Hi8
footage as part of an ongoing 20-year old project. They discovered that they
didn’t have a machine that could also digitize the audio signal from those Hi8 tapes, but! Those VHS dubs used for synching in editing (like I mentioned earlier) were still intact, and so was the audio. Project saved!
Since then, I've bought a VHS camera and have started a label to distribute my friends' films on VHS. So far supplies have been cheap, and I bet you a dollar people'll be watching those same tapes 20 years from now, and falling in love with VHS like I have.
(Magnifying glass + my VHS camera = cool depth of focus!)
Post by Jenna Caravello
The Kartemquin Inventory Project is generously funded by:
