|
Author
|
Topic: Gone With the Wind screenshots
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Osi Osgood
Film God
Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted February 07, 2014 12:39 PM
Thanks Winbert ...
The point is, if the print is from the same company, with the same production standards (and possibly even from the same print run, but that can't be absolutely proven), same film stock ect. then most but not all prints will have the same color and quality.
The print I will be selling doesn't have a knick or scratch on it and has gorgeous color. Those screenshots look identical to the print I'm selling. That's why.
Believe me, if I could get screenshots like that, I wouldn't ask.
--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael O'Regan
Film God
Posts: 3085
From: Essex, UK
Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted February 07, 2014 05:06 PM
quote:
You should not use screenshots from another print. I think for a film as expensive as GWTW most potential buyers would want to see the actual print being offered even if you state that your print is the same quality as these pictures. I dont think buyers are looking for perfect screenshots, just good enough to show the colour and any marks etc.
Well said, Graham.
I can't imagine anyone from this forum ever buying a print for the kind of money GWTW fetches, based on screenshots from another print. In fact, I'm pretty certain that, if someone else had put such an auction up on ebay, it would have immediately been brought to our attention here, in the "Ebay Oddities" section, as being ridiculous.
Is this the direction in which we'd like to see the hobby go now?
Come on, Osi. Get a grip, bud.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
Osi Osgood
Film God
Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted February 08, 2014 12:01 PM
Hmmmm ...
Gee folks, lets look at the facts ...
1. Same company (DERANN)
2. Same Film (Gone With The Wind)
3. Same Film stock
4. Same negatives, (perhaps another new negative, but from the exact same source material)
... and, as will be stated in the auction, the shots are not from the same print, but from a print with all the same properties as the one with the screenshots, personally verified by me, and as scratch-less as the print in the screenshots.
Now, that isn't so hard to understand. Besides, I could understand all the fuss if I was using a 16MM print screenshots, or from a DVD (how many times have we seen that on ebay?), but no, I'm using screenshots from a super 8 print, from the same company, with the same film stock and the very same quality. In fact, better, as, screenshots never do full justice to a super 8 print. Close, but never quite as good.
Besides, if you don't want to bid on it, then don't, just have fun nit-picking ...
Oh, by the way, OSI, has a firm "grip"
--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Osi Osgood
Film God
Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted February 08, 2014 12:21 PM
I'm not pissed, everybody has they're own opinion, it's just that I have never mis-represented a single print I have ever sold, and even with a top dollar print like this, I wouldn't start now ...
... and yes, it has worked before and as in the other circumstances, I have always stated that, if the screenshots are not from the specific print they are from the same film companies print and on the same film stocks and image quality.
--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winbert Hutahaean
Film God
Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted February 09, 2014 10:09 PM
Hi Mike,
As I said above putting pictures not from the print being offered has become a norm in Ebay.
How do you see these listings which I randomly picked:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/16mm-Feature-LO VERS-AND-LIARS-LPP-GOLDIE-HAWN-R-RATED-VERSION-MINT-/201031478590?pt=US_Film&hash=item2ece68ed3e
http://www.ebay.com/itm/251441808463
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Laurel-Ha rdy-Gyp-the-Gypsy-The-Bohemian-Girl-400-super-8-sound-Blackhawk-/251446563240?pt=US_Film&hash=item3a8b6211a8
We have been discussing before about this issue (putting picture from other sources), and seems to me as long as it is stated in the description, we are OK with that.
quote:
In the same way anybody selling their house would not use photos of the house next door and state that the room sizes are the same, same builder, same bricks, same age etc.
This even more often to happen in non-film related items' listings. For example:
http://www.ebay.com/i tm/New-Sony-VAIO-SVF15A18CXB-15-5-Touchscreen-Laptop-i7-3537U-2-0GHz-16GB-1TB-8GB-/251447395433?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item3a8b6ec469
Do you think the picture on the above listing is from his own laptop being offered?
No he took from photo stocks of the same item, same size, same company, same color, etc.
If we are OK with the above listing, why we should think different for Osi's.
If I were a potential buyer of the above laptop listing, before I am placing my bid, I will ask first his own laptop's photo. You can also do the same for films listing, right?
The thing is just because OSI requests the pictures publicly does not make his listing become illegitimate.
My 2 cents though,
--------------------
Winbert
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dino Everette
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1535
From: Long Beach, CA USA
Registered: Dec 2008
|
posted February 10, 2014 12:06 AM
For me there is a difference between using stock photos and/or obvious publicity stills for a listing than using pictures of someone elses projected film print. Personally I would rather see an actual picture of the film reels or the derann boxes, etc. than images from someone elses print. Classic just sold the Star Wars print for decent money and only had a picture of the boxes. I know Osi is not doing it to deceive but I doubt I would purchase a print from someone I did not know if they used pictures from a different print.
Osi, many of us have seen some of your music videos, just shoot a vid since you are well skilled at that, then they can hear the audio as well.
I think in this day and age it raises a red flag to most people to hear someone say they cannot get a picture of something because it seems unthinkable when digi cameras can be had for pennies, or if you have a cel phone, or if you have a laptop, or a tablet, or a kindle
--------------------
"You're too Far Out Miss Lawrence"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
