8mm Forum: Star Wars Feature

This is topic Star Wars Feature in forum 8mm films for sale/trade/wanted at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=003316

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on February 20, 2012, 07:48 AM:

Here we go again! Let's see how much this one sells for.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/STAR-WARS-SUPER-8MM-SOUND-SUPER-8-FULL-FILM-VGC-/400278540685?pt=UK_DVD_Film_TV_OtherFormats_GL&hash=item5d3275d18d

Posted by Jim Schrader (Member # 9) on February 20, 2012, 08:30 AM:

the seller claims it was sealed then how come there is one reel that is different?

Posted by Lee Purkis (Member # 2523) on February 20, 2012, 08:41 AM:

I can see that it's a late agfa copy as well so it could be bluish, i really doubt that it will be much good. Someone will probably pay silly money and end up being disappointed. I don't see why there are no screen shots either, the seller has a camera and only just ran it.

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on February 20, 2012, 09:44 AM:

Help me Obi Wan Kanobi... your my only hope!

Posted by Lee Purkis (Member # 2523) on February 20, 2012, 10:00 AM:

Pat it's worth no more than £249.99 [Razz]

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on February 20, 2012, 11:22 AM:

Lee

I'm sure it is. May the force be with you!

Posted by Lee Purkis (Member # 2523) on February 20, 2012, 12:53 PM:

I reckon it's going to be a rough print. It looks like it was made up from salvage parts from a couple of returned prints, then resealed and sold on again by Derann. That's my theory anyway.

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on February 20, 2012, 02:34 PM:

Lee-How can you tell it is an Agfa print? I didn't see anything in the description.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 20, 2012, 02:48 PM:

I think Agfa or AG1S or AG2S may be just about readable on the print in the third pic there but I couldn't be sure.

Posted by Lee Purkis (Member # 2523) on February 21, 2012, 04:34 AM:

It does say AG2s on the 2nd reel down and on the third reel down it says AG1s, so at least two reels are definitely agfa.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 21, 2012, 01:29 PM:

Well, it's certainly not a "shrink wrapped" or cellophaned brand new print, as those are not the "vintage" reels it was sold on.

But then the reels aren't all that important, of course. I'm always fascinated as to just how much these end up going for, (STAR WARS, that is), as it can get rather silly. I'm not complaining, my extra print went for a thousand and of course, we know of one lucky seller who got 1,700 or so for his!

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 21, 2012, 01:34 PM:

It's always fascinated me actually. Why does this title sell for so high a price?

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 21, 2012, 01:38 PM:

Two very imnportant factors, which no other super 8 print can say ...

1. It's STAR WARS
2. It's Star Wars!

OK, that doesn't explain it.

The main reason why is the "cross-over" value.

While most super 8 prints would only appeal to Super 8 col-lectors, (duh!), STAR WARS appeals to a much wider audience of collectors.

Many a STAR WARS fan, even if they don't even own a super 8 projector, are willing to bid this title up, just to say that they own an actual film print of they're beloved movie. I can understand that, and appreciate it, (as I have, of course, profited by it.)

... and that's why people who own super 8 are befuddled when they think, "Oh Goodie! I can sell "Seven Brides for Seven Brother", for a thousand, onlt to see it sit on ebay forever.
Other super 8 prints will never have the resale value that STA WARS has.

In truth, the Super 8 STAR WARS feature is just about the only (or perhaps one of the few) that actually is worth more than when it was first printed, even when comparing pound for pound from back then!

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 21, 2012, 01:42 PM:

That sounds reasonable.
I never really got the whole SW thing.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 21, 2012, 01:46 PM:

By the way! HEY MIcheal! Good to hear from ya!

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on February 21, 2012, 01:49 PM:

And it's the original version and not altered. Even the DVD's are out of print and going for big bucks:

http://www.amazon.com/Star-Wars-Trilogy-Widescreen-Theatrical/dp/B001EN71DG/ref=sr_1_6?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1329853057&sr=1-6

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 549) on February 22, 2012, 01:20 AM:

Screen shots are up now. Reel two at least looks good to me, not washed out and good solid blues without being "blueish".

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 22, 2012, 01:08 PM:

I like the blacks in some of those shots, (the shot with the DeathStar, for instance). Some prints, as commented on before, will have a bluish tend, which affects the space. When I compared the two prints I roginally owned, one had a slightly bluish cast, and that's the one I parted with. People who don't really know color quality and saturation wouldn't give a rip ...

but hey, I'm "preaching to the choir" here! With a title like this, you want as perfect a color saturation as possible.

By the way, I have seen a few prints that have been slightly too green in thier color as well.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on February 22, 2012, 04:09 PM:

Wow, we're giving this seller a hard time.

He listed it at 0.99p

Sorry, but that does look like Derann shrink wrap, spilt edges and all.

Osi, sorry to disagree (again; honestly, I'm not trying to make a habit of this) but those are vintage Derann spools. They're Grasso spools surely?

Now the original print run were generally on white Grasso spools, but Derann often mixed black / white spools, and I've received many a brand new feature from Derann on a complete variety of spools!

The writing on the spools in white marker on black / black on white is exactly as Derann would have marked them...maybe the guy is also a hand writing fraudster.

The fact that Pt.2 looks different isn't necessarily worrying, as often print runs had issues from reel to reel, which could have resulted in replacing reels before packing.

Of course, it could be a totally dodgy print made up from all sorts, but the screen shots look ok and the asking price seems fair...the fact that it has rocketed up to nearly £200.00 is in the hands of the bidders.

I wouldn't like to get riiped-off, but I see nothing inherently wrong with this guy's listing.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 23, 2012, 01:25 PM:

I never ran into a single brand new feature from Derann on white and black reels, now something from thier used film list, that would happen often, but not on something brand new.

Come to think of it, I don't think this seller is saying that it's brand new.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on February 23, 2012, 02:57 PM:

No, I don't think he is either; it certainly isn't a first print run as these were in separate 600ft boxes, but it could still be a later run.

Reel 2 had problems right from the beginning. I had to change my first run print reel 2 twice before it was ok back in 1989, so the fact reel 2 is on a different colour spool MAY not be a problem - that certainly looks like original Derann markings on it.

Later prints did suffer from more negative damage, but this print may still be alright and given the original asking price, may still prove to be an enjoyable bargain for someone.

Of course it may be a duffer also...if anyone here wins it, please let us know!

Osi, up until about 10 years ago, I agree Derann prints were supplied on uniform spools, but I've had features since that were supplied lab new on all sorts of different spools.

"The Reptile" springs to mind, lovely new print ordered especially and brand new but supplied 5 x 400ft on all sorts of different spools!

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on February 23, 2012, 04:36 PM:

Just coming in on this discussion on spooling, Derann were never
that particular on uniformity regarding their spool colours,some
of you may remember when Derek asked collectors to send in
any spools that were not required so that they could be used again.There was also some erratic spooling with "El Cid" & also
"Fall of the Roman Empire" when first released being sent out
on 600 & 400 spools mixed.Some of my ancient std 8mm features
have the odd spool in.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on February 26, 2012, 01:39 PM:

[ February 27, 2012, 06:35 AM: Message edited by: Rob Young. ]

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on February 26, 2012, 02:29 PM:

quote:
That sounds reasonable.
I never really got the whole SW thing

You must believe in "The Force" to understand it!

Posted by Chris Fries (Member # 2719) on February 26, 2012, 04:15 PM:

It just ended at £513 or a little over $800.

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 549) on February 26, 2012, 10:11 PM:

Is there a Super 8 feature that consistently sells for more than Star Wars?

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on February 27, 2012, 01:26 AM:

The Rose 400ft. I remember being outbid at the last moment! (Sorry I couldn't resist!)

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 27, 2012, 01:21 PM:

I really don't think there is, besides, potentially, the other STAR WARS titles, especially "Empire Strikes Back", since it tends to be a little rarer than STAR WARS.

After all, the bar was set rather high with that 1,700 sale a few months back of STAR WARS.

The only other time I have seen really outrageously high bids was for films such as "Freaks" on super 8. I remember the one print of that on ebay, went for a two or three hundred dollars, or more, which was rather high for that B?W super 8 print.

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on February 27, 2012, 10:20 PM:

I bid on it. It went for around $450. Grrrr!!!

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on February 29, 2012, 11:20 AM:

Well, here comes another one:
Star Wars Cineavision on eBay

I know we've had more than one discussion here comparing the various Star Wars full-feature releases, but was just surprised to see that nobody's ever entered a review of them into our Super 8 reviews section. May I suggest that to someone, please?

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 29, 2012, 01:51 PM:

That's one of Fred K. Wilders prints! I recognize the boxes! He would do that for his best prints (place photo's and all that stuff!) I have bought from him in the past!

I don't know if he sold it to someone else or if he has finally taken the plunge to sell on ebay.

That Cineavision print is completely unfaded, which is rare, as I believe that release was on Kodak SP, but it might well be on a low fade stock. Now there's a true rarity, epscially for the STAR WARS crowd. Wish I had the extra money to bid on it.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on February 29, 2012, 03:16 PM:

Oh, here we go again!

CINEAVISION???

NO!

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 29, 2012, 06:15 PM:

You guys forgot .....? This is Alan Rik, member of rhis forum. He is selling THE ROSE on 1200' reel [Smile]

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on February 29, 2012, 06:40 PM:

Interesting that the price went as high as it did, in my opinion. Something going for a very high price can of course tend to bring out more of the same item, with others hoping to get similar sums. Considering that several copies of SW have sold in several months, it goes to show that some bidders dropping out has not caused prices to drop too much. I bet the seller is delighted.

Posted by Chris Fries (Member # 2719) on February 29, 2012, 11:04 PM:

I have a copy of the rarest of the rare.

Here it is. "THE ROSE" starring Bette Midler and Alan Bates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFZ7-1lYIoE

As you can see, the color is wonderful and the sound is the most amazing magnetic mono you have ever heard.

The greatest 17 min. of film you will ever see.

It can be yours to enjoy forever for the low, low price of only $500. A true bargain.

There will never be another like it.

Ever.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 01, 2012, 12:48 PM:

The seller stated that it is in fact Eastman LPP. Well, that's good to know, and unexpected. At least, it won't fade.

The only downside is that the color doesn't appear to be as rich and saturated as it is on the Derann scope print, but just for rarities sake, it's certainly a nice find.

Posted by Jon Addams (Member # 816) on March 06, 2012, 07:28 PM:

Just ended a $1200 - Nice sale.

Jon

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on March 06, 2012, 08:37 PM:

Wonderful colour,if you're into blue and purple.This was on Perry's
lists years ago for £8.00 and they still couldn't shift them,now I
know why.God spare us.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on March 06, 2012, 08:49 PM:

Hugh what do you mean by £8.00 ?

A digest...? but this is a full feature.

BTW, if you see the screen shots, they are a but purplish and pale.

But if you see the youtube link, the colors are strong and perfect. Do you guys know why?

Posted by Akshay Nanjangud (Member # 2828) on March 06, 2012, 09:18 PM:

There was some discussion on getting new prints of a Star Wars feature on the forum sometime back. How much would it cost to get a made-to-order print? Would it exceed $1000?

Posted by Joe Taffis (Member # 4) on March 06, 2012, 09:18 PM:

I think Winbert and Hugh are both confused by THE ROSE vs. STAR WARS connections in this post [Big Grin]

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on March 07, 2012, 01:30 AM:

Let me answer..let me! [Smile]

I don't like to comment on auctions while they are in progress but now its over.. .
The actual youtube clip was filmed off the wall using my iphone 4s. Not even any flicker! And that is how the print actually looks in person. The other photos were scanned using an Epson V500. Maybe it needs color correction? Not sure why but the iphones colors are truer.
I did like that print and it was hard to decide which print to sell. I have the Derann print and there are definitely more of the Derann prints around than that one.
The content of the prints are the same (and no...the Cinevision print didn't have the 2nd Grappling hook throw at the chasm!) with the exception of the subtitles with Greedo in the Cantina scene, and the opening scrawl which is the original and not the New Hope version. And also the Cinevision print does have cropped sides so you do get a slightly wider view of the film.
The print quality is actually very good but Osi is correct in that the contrast is better on the Derann print in most scenes except for the scene with Obi Wan and Luke in Tattoine where Luke is given the lightsaber. The Cinevision print looks much better than the Derann print and is more defined compared to the Derann print which looks a little more blown out highlights wise.
I re-recorded the sound on the Derann print and I screened both prints one after another. 4 hours of Star Wars! In the end being lazy I decided to keep the Derann print....even though it is the New Hope version so I wouldn't have to re-record the audio again. Because in Stereo with the Elmo Speakers on the side of the screen...I felt like I was a kid again sitting in the darkened theatre watching Luke, Han, and Leia..when all was good with the world. (Except in California where there was a drought and we were not allowed to turn on the sprinklers except for in the mornings and only 3 times a week!)

Posted by Ricky Daniels (Member # 95) on March 07, 2012, 05:22 AM:

Hi Alan,

Congratulations on your sale. Regarding "also the Cinevision print does have cropped sides so you do get a slightly wider view" just one correction, sorry I can't help myself being a Telecine Colourist!

There is no cropping to the sides on the CineaVision style print, what you see in the Super 8mm frame is the FULL 2.35:1 Panavision original and what you get is a slightly 'taller' view i.e. more of the original top and bottom of frame. However, there is cropping to the top and bottom of the Derann 2.66:1 print i.e. the 2.35:1 original fits the Super 8mm frame width showing the original full frame width (as does the CineaVision style print) but as a consequence the top and bottom of the original 2.35:1 are lost, but I'm sure you already know this.

Making a choice between the two styles of print is a hard one I agree, so hard in fact I can't be without a copy both in my collection... why I don't know, maybe it's a 'new' illness [Big Grin]

Enjoy,
Rick

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on March 07, 2012, 06:21 AM:

No Joe,Winbert and I aren't confused,I was responding to the comment Chris made regarding the quality etc on the "Rose"
clip he'd put on you tube about the print quality being great
which I didn't think it was.Mind you,it is difficult to see the words
for the $ signs.

Posted by Martin Davey (Member # 2841) on March 07, 2012, 07:09 AM:

I must admit that I much prefer the 'cinevision' format for 'scope films. It would have been nice if derann had gone down that route but I suppose it means making another inter negative/ optical printer stage to get the master material that way, which I'm sure was quite expensive.
It was just always annoying, when running trailers in particular, that the type in the image would sometimes be cut off top and bottom on the more conventional 'scope print. But maybe using scope lenses in conjunction with S8 was a step too far overall considering the technical limitations of the format, a 4x3 image just always seems tidier and sharper to me!

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on March 07, 2012, 07:36 AM:

Hi Ricky,
Yes you are correct! That is what I meant.
I would have loved to have both but I made the reserve high maybe "hoping" It wouldn't sell and then I would be forced to keep the print! But the "Force" was too strong with this one. [Smile]

Posted by Chris Fries (Member # 2719) on March 07, 2012, 10:33 AM:

And now, a wonderful quote...

from "Young Frankenstein".

Frederick: What's the matter with you people? I was joking! Don't you know a joke when you hear one?

[Big Grin]

But seriously, congrats Alan.

We can debate about ratios and colors and all, but at the end of the day it is still a beautiful print. If I could afford it, I would be so happy to have this film in my library. This and a Derann print. This, a Derann print, Empire and Jedi.

I can dream, can't I?

[Smile]

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on March 07, 2012, 10:56 AM:

Chris,...nothing is impossible.

I started my super 8mm collection back in 1985 when my father brought home a projector (Sankyo 501) to Indonesia. I was so amazed and started buying films from local flea markets. I learned about Derann wonderful prints in 1996 when I was assigned to Australia for studying.

Being from a developing country and the limited budget I had, it was far from my imagination to have these Derann prints, so I could only buy the usual prints.

But there is a time when finally I have several Derann prints in my collection (that include Star Wars) by re-selling all multiple copies I had (both films and vinyls), that I could get extra money. Basically I did not need to spend so much money to fill my hobby.

So, patience and perseverance are the two words in my life of collecting.

cheers,

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on March 07, 2012, 02:09 PM:

Winbert, thats lovely and we want to hear of those prints you
parted with and probably would like again,so get on the link and
let us know.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on March 07, 2012, 04:02 PM:

Hugh, most of my revenue came from vinyls. Selling films only for those I have double in my collection.

Vinyls are so scarce in Indonesia, while as a government official I have more chance to travel abroad. So when returned home I brought vinyls that I bought only $1-2 from western country flea markets. It could be re-sold 10 to 30 times from the original prices.

I have my own place to sell vinyls:

http://www.kaskus.us/showthread.php?t=6129107

It is in Indonesian of course.

Those vinyls fund my film collecting hobby [Wink]

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2