Показать сообщение отдельно
Старый 09.03.2013, 16:48 Язык оригинала: Русский       #36
Старожил
 
Аватар для kozhinart
 
Регистрация: 20.09.2008
Адрес: Moscow,Russia
Сообщений: 694
Спасибо: 1,324
Поблагодарили 1,086 раз(а) в 255 сообщениях
Записей в дневнике: 15
Репутация: 2082
Отправить сообщение для kozhinart с помощью ICQ Отправить сообщение для kozhinart с помощью Yahoo Отправить сообщение для kozhinart с помощью Skype™
По умолчанию

Цитата:
Сообщение от Vladimir Vladimirovich Посмотреть сообщение
In contemporary cinema, no one will use an expensive antique paintings. Why risk held liable! Unfortunately gone are the days when the frame appeared authentic muskets, swords, painting. Easier to print to print. All the same, the audience will not notice. It would be right preglashat ekspertov.Sovetyvatsya. Semachnaya group follows the path of least cost.
In today's movie and not just long ispolzuyutsya not the originals. That is correct, because the original can be damaged by shooting randomly. Sometimes in areas where hang paintings, originals are shooting, and if the pictures are insured, the insurance companies are different terms for hranieniyu paintings and insurance cases and so on, which carries with it certain legal consequences. Sometimes used komyuternaya graphics and collage, which also saves the budget. The same statement that no one will use an antique painting is not quite true, it all depends on the circumstances and goals. In public places visited, I think it is risky to broadcast originals, whether antique or modern painting, from a legal point of view they are equal in value. And the restoration cost is not cheap. Therefore, in such institutions as dressing well and good, in my opinion to use prints.
__________________
У всякого из нас имеются иллюзии, которые он не хотел бы разрушать.Али Апшерони



kozhinart вне форума   Ответить с цитированием