8mm Forum: Empire Strikes Back Cineavision scope full length feature for sale on ebay

This is topic Empire Strikes Back Cineavision scope full length feature for sale on ebay 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=003370

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 19, 2012, 01:06 PM:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320871515112

I think I have that link correct. Yep, it's expensive, but it's also darned rare, and my wife and I certainly are not going to screw ourselves out of a rarity like this!

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on March 19, 2012, 01:47 PM:

Osi,

At that price I reckon you'll need some shots up there.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on March 19, 2012, 02:10 PM:

Osi, didn't you post that your friend was looking for this very print. Why don't you just ask him to buy it.

Congratulation for your first URL link....! [Big Grin]

Copy and paste ...easy euh?!

BTW, this would be your tough competitor:

16mm feature film EMPIRE STRIKES BACK LPP Star Wars

cheers,

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on March 19, 2012, 02:25 PM:

Recent flat version of Return of the Jedi went for almost $1000:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&_trksid=p4340.l2557&hash=item2c63bc34d8&item=190651839704&nma=true&pt=US_Film&rt=nc&si=ppwUwXha9FcdLSQZcnpj2gG488o%253D&orig_cvip=true &rt=nc

That Empire is also flat. Osi's is Scope.

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on March 20, 2012, 01:04 AM:

So Osi, I presume you prefer the Derann print even with the top/bottom cropping?

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on March 20, 2012, 01:51 AM:

I did with the Star Wars prints. I knew the significance of the earlier mono print and its rarity. But when I saw them side by side (not at the same time of course) I felt the difference was pretty remarkable. When watching the Derann print I felt like I was watching Star Wars as I remember it as a kid. But when I saw the Cinevision print I knew I was watching a Super 8 film if that makes sense. It reminded me of the little viewers that you hand cranked and held up to the light to watch Star Wars. They were loaded with probably 25 ft of Super 8 film if that.
But the print of Empire at that price seems very reasonable. I NEVER see Empire for sale. Its tempting to bid but I'm holding out for Raiders of the Lost Ark. Or Rocky III. Hint hint....!

Posted by Akshay Nanjangud (Member # 2828) on March 20, 2012, 01:05 PM:

The 16mm print sold for over $2000. Someone please please correct me here but isn't getting a new print going to be in the same price range?

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 20, 2012, 01:07 PM:

Haha! Sorry Rik, but still gonna hold onto to Rocky 3. It's on LPP, by the way (Rocky 3).

The fellow who was originally going to buy "Empire" had to back out, and so, due to financial situations, I have to part with it. I only hope that it will garner a nice price tag. 1,200.00 is the least we'd want to let go of it for, but we would certainly like to see it go up. I'm really not paying attention to all the "views" and "watches" on this one, as they are probably fellow forum members just curious to see if it sells.

I must say, I do like the image quality of Empire. One thing I didn't mention on the auction I'll add here. There is slight wear at the ends of the original reel changes, but it is not too bad.

I would LOVE to put up screenshots, and I will try to do a few tonight, but my damned digital camera NEVER represents the actual color well, and I certainly don't want to see this print short, as it does have very nice color.

Posted by Jon Addams (Member # 816) on March 20, 2012, 01:34 PM:

I don’t like auctions with RESERVE, but sometimes it the way to go, especially when it’s known there is a tremendous amount of interest in an item such as this one. It’s a nice way to get a bidders war on it and who know how high it could climb.

True, there are many that won’t even bid on a reserve auction BUT so are that those that will not bid on an item with such a high starting bid.

I believe an auction such as this may fair better with a low, say $9.99, starting bid and a reserve of $1200.00 which is the lowest amount the seller is seeking.

You can almost bet on lots of bidders in such a scenario with the print selling for $1200 or higher or not selling at all, is the reserve isn’t met.

This is just my couple of pennies worth of unsolicited advice. [Wink]

Jon

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 20, 2012, 01:52 PM:

Ahh yes Jon ...

but I have seen very valuable items started at a rediculously low starting bid and just because of the variables that life brings, only one person will bid on it. In fact, I have even see a few STAR WARS features in past years go like that, (but not 9.95!).

The seller just has to protect themselves. I personally think Reserve prices tend to work against you. They've worked against me.

Posted by Greg Marshall (Member # 1268) on March 20, 2012, 01:54 PM:

Tongue hanging out here.

Posted by Jon Addams (Member # 816) on March 20, 2012, 02:05 PM:

quote:
The seller just has to protect themselves. I personally think Reserve prices tend to work against you. They've worked against me.

As I said, I don't like reserves either but the seller never gets hurt using one because if the item doesn't bring the reserve price, there are no winners, even if the final price is 1 penny less than the reserve price.

Of course the item can be relisted, if not sold, or you would have a choice to sell it to the biddeer that came 1 penny under the reserve.

As I said earlier, the seller never loses in a reserve auction other than the listing fee.

In any event, good luck with the auction.

Jon

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on March 20, 2012, 04:05 PM:

quote:
The 16mm print sold for over $2000. Someone please please correct me here but isn't getting a new print going to be in the same price range?

No... we are talking a legal print here, do you think George Lucas will let you re-print it on 16mm for $2000.....nope!

Just to say you have enough money to re-print, the questions are:

1. Who has the negative now?
2. Which lab is willing to take the risk?

So the only way is to locate it at second market.

cheers,

Posted by Akshay Nanjangud (Member # 2828) on March 20, 2012, 04:47 PM:

Thanks, Winbert. So, we need to find someone who has the negatives and has legal permission to print the feature. Okay.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 21, 2012, 01:09 PM:

Hey Jon!

Actually I think it can huert an auction to have a reserve price. The reason why I can say that is because I have been turned off from bidding on some auctions because of a reserve price. I'll bid on something I want, it won't meet the reserve.

Bid on it again.

... nope, haven'r reached the reserve price. So then I'll say, "Well, hell, it must be unrealistically high. I quit!"

... and I'm sure that I'm not the only person who has felt that way. So yes, I believe at times, a reserve price can screw your auction.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on March 26, 2012, 09:55 AM:

About 3 hours left, Osi!

I'm excited for you! [Smile]

Wish I could afford it! [Frown]

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 28, 2012, 01:01 PM:

I relisted it, though I know it's only a matter of time before it sells. I'm patient.

Posted by Jim Schrader (Member # 9) on March 28, 2012, 01:29 PM:

a super 8 digest print just sold for 100.00 this is crazy
http://www.ebay.com/itm/150782875790?ssPageName=STRK:MEDWX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1435.l2649

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on March 28, 2012, 01:40 PM:

Osi,

I may be wrong, but my feeling is that NOBODY is going to consider spending this much money on a print without seeing some screenshots from the print.

Posted by John Skujins (Member # 1515) on March 28, 2012, 01:46 PM:

Wow that is crazy, Jim. $100.00 for a part one digest that is described as reddening! Some bidder had an inaccurate perception of its rarity, for sure. Those red part ones come up pretty often on ebay.

Posted by James N. Savage 3 (Member # 83) on March 29, 2012, 06:47 AM:

Yes Michael, I'd have to agree about the screen shots. They are usually posted for even the smallest films, and for the price on this one, I believe you will need something. A photo of the box and / or reels, at the very least.

James.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 29, 2012, 01:06 PM:

I'm thinking that too. I'm just wanting to figure out HOW to get my digital camera to take screenshots without "browning out" everything that I shoot, as I don't want to mis-represent this beautiful print! It's frustrating!!

Posted by Janice Glesser (Member # 2758) on March 29, 2012, 02:07 PM:

Osi...Project it onto a white piece of paper. Turn off your flash or cover it with tape. If that doesn't work...use your camcorder or the video feature on your camera...shoot a few minutes. Capture the footage into your computer and then do screen captures. These should be good enough for EBay.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on March 29, 2012, 02:09 PM:

My Blackberry grabs excellent shots - more than good enough for ebay. You don't need a fancy camera. If the print is good it'll look fine.
You only need to worry if it's faded or something.

Posted by Graham Sinden (Member # 431) on March 29, 2012, 05:40 PM:

Osi,

I totally agree with michael about screenshots. But I have to say I think the bigger problem is that its on SP and because of this its way overpriced, im sorry to say. I certaintly would never pay this much for a film on SP no matter how rare. It may have very good colour but the chances are it will fade in the future, and my own experience with SP is the blacks start to go first and turn reddish.

I hope you get a good price but the fact its not on LPP may put off many collectors.

Graham S

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on March 30, 2012, 07:21 AM:

Graham, I believe all films will fade eventually. Only the matter how fast it goes. I have films on AGFA (Derann print to be noted) that is now fade. Dont have experience with LPP yet just considering the company itself call it LOW fade not NO Fade stock [Smile]

Cheers

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 30, 2012, 01:35 PM:

HEY! Happy update!

I just purchased a "Flip" brand Ultra HD video camera, (boy! that thing is tiny!), and I will ateempt in the next day or two to shoot a video of the "Hoth Battle" sequence. That ought to do!

Now, I don't know how to do a link for the video to an auction. Alan ... can you provide some help, as you have obviously had experience with this kind of thing?

Posted by Adam Deierling (Member # 2307) on March 30, 2012, 01:41 PM:

Hi Osi, I have done this before. Its a great way to show off your print on ebay. I would be happy to show you how to do it. Not very hard.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 31, 2012, 12:27 PM:

Well, I'm a little annoyed ...

I shot about 45 seconds from the "Hoth Attack" sequence, and it's obviously that this "Flip" phone isn't designed to photograph a super 8 film in the dark. The image is plenty bright and in focus, but the color is really lacking in the video footage and of course, you can't adjust "color drive" on a super 8 print. The print has gorgeous blues, facial tones, ect. This print on the video looks terribly faded, with almost no rich blues and other colors, so I'm really debating whether I should put the video up! The last thing I want to do is actually mis-represent the print!

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on March 31, 2012, 01:08 PM:

Why don't you just take some screenshots????

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 02, 2012, 12:42 PM:

I have a digital camera, but it doesn't have a function to adjust the color settings to allow for night time shooting from a projected image. (well, at least I haven't figured them out if they exist). I'll have a second look at it. It's a "Kodak Vision" moel camera.

Posted by Bill Phelps (Member # 1431) on April 02, 2012, 01:09 PM:

I don't really have any trouble with screen shots...even with my crappy cell phone. Most of the time my issues are with sharpness due to the moving images.

Bill [Smile]

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 02, 2012, 01:26 PM:

sharpness "taint" the problem, it's the color representation, as any print loses a lot of it's value for resale when it has color loss, so you see my probelm with, for instance, the video I shot with my new camera, which makes the print look terribly faded.

Do we have some way of sharing video on this forum, or would I have to load it up on you tube and then make a link?

Posted by Bill Phelps (Member # 1431) on April 02, 2012, 01:31 PM:

Well, I meant the pictures I take (with no adjustments) represent the color of the print, they are sometimes fuzzy thats all.

Bill [Smile]

WOW 500 posts!

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on April 02, 2012, 01:49 PM:

Why not stick a couple shots up here first and I'm sure there will be some who can advise you whether or not they're OK.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 03, 2012, 01:07 PM:

Congratulations Bill! [Smile]

Welcome the happy bunch of us with a mis-spent life! Hahahaha!

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2