8mm Forum: Bad news regarding UK 16mm library

This is topic Bad news regarding UK 16mm library in forum 16mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000644

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on May 28, 2011, 12:53 PM:

Filmbank Distributors must have been the last UK library other than the BFI to hire out 16mm films. In response to a query a few days ago, I was told: "Unfortunately Filmbank no longer provides 16mm print. All 16mm titles were recalled back to the Studio a couple of years back."

I'd like to know what happened to them because it was a massive library - I'd estimate they had roughly about 5,000 features on offer, and of course the number of prints would have been considerably higher, as they would have generally had more than one copy.

Posted by Simon McConway (Member # 219) on May 29, 2011, 04:40 PM:

Very interesting post, Adrian. I'd too like to know where all these prints went. The last time I hired was around 2001 and they had some very up-to-date titles back then. Might Steve at Derann know something? I can't believe that every print was required by one single "studio"?

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on June 10, 2011, 09:03 PM:

I've received this depressing reply from the BFI:

"The old Filmbank 16mm library was cleared out a few years ago : some went out to Australia, I think, but most were scrapped. The cost of keeping the library in storage alone was draining their resources."

What a waste! I don't know what the norm was in terms of numbers of prints per title, but if it was around 4 on average, that could be 20,000 features destroyed. Don't the idiots making such decisions realise that some prints would be worth hundreds of pounds each?

Posted by Joerg Polzfusz (Member # 602) on June 14, 2011, 05:38 AM:

quote:
Don't the idiots making such decisions realise that some prints would be worth hundreds of pounds each?

I'm pretty sure that the contracts didn't allow Filmbank to sell the prints. (Same contracts as with the video rental stores and all the tapes/DVSs/blurays marked "not for sale, rental only".) And getting the licenses, ... would have probably lasted too long and might have cost more than the prints are worth...

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on June 14, 2011, 06:39 AM:

The people making the decisions also probably have no idea that there are people who still collect film prints.

Posted by Nick Field (Member # 2132) on June 14, 2011, 07:42 AM:

What a complete and utter waste [Eek!]

Posted by Den Brown (Member # 819) on June 14, 2011, 03:16 PM:

I contacted a director about an old documentary I wanted and was told "what a shame, I just dumped a load of 16mm prints of that one into the trash".

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on June 15, 2011, 02:47 AM:

I do take the point regarding licensing but after hearing this news, I needed to let off some steam! However futile it might be, this outcome could be considered a warning with regard to what might happen before long in relation to any major 16mm libraries that still exist, particularly Swank. If there's any indication of it coming to an end at some point, maybe some US dealers/collectors could make a pre-emptive move by offering them (e.g.) something like $200,000. A figure like that might be difficult to ignore; would save paying for destruction and would offer scope to pay different distributors owning rights a worthwhile royalty. And it would be satisfying to convince someone that old issues such as piracy and unauthorised public screenings are irrelevant now.

Posted by Clive Carmock (Member # 347) on September 21, 2011, 02:38 PM:

A great shame - I remember hiring many 16mm prints from Filmbank, even back to the days when they were Rank Film Library.

About 5 years ago I approached them with a request to purchase a 16mm copy of Bless This House (mad I know but a film I have liked for years). They responded confirming they had 4 copies but were unable to sell any as the prints were actually owned by the studios.

They told me there ws no point in contacting Granada (who own the rights to the ex Rank catalogue) as they wouldn't agree to a sale. However I persevered and did contact Granada and was delighted to hear that if I was willing to sign a document to say I wouldn't attempt to copy or use the print for any commercial use then they would be willing to sell a copy, which they duly recalled from Filmbank and sent on to me.

Thankfully the copy was good- no sign of turning pink etc.

A shame to hear their 16mm library has now gone.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on September 21, 2011, 07:54 PM:

Clive - that's an astonishing story, probably the only time I've heard of someone being able to negotiate the purchase of a 16mm library print. Owning the film must seem miraculous if you think that if 4 prints of a title was typical, the other 3 and around 20,000 other features were destroyed about 3 years later! I wondered how much they charged you for it, and was the document you signed something they produced specially, or did they already have one for such situations? It goes to show how even in recent years, people make a special case for 16mm, as it would make more sense to ask everyone buying a DVD to sign such a document, considering how much easier a DVD would be to copy.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on September 22, 2011, 12:57 PM:

If I was a 16MM collector, I would certainly find out where the remaining 16MM libraries are, make a letter of petition concerning thier libraries, just to make sure that if they should close down, they would most certianly make an enormous amount of money selling instead of scraping them ...

...excpet for those prints that they are specifically liscensed to destroy upon closure. You can't do much about that.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on September 22, 2011, 03:41 PM:

I encouraged collectors in the USA (on the 16mm forum) to try and do something before the just closed Criterion library is probably destroyed. I expect it's only a matter of time in relation to Swank too. I know the distibutors have their brains programmed to destroy when it comes to 16mm, but surely there's a chance that they might realise that copying and unauthorised screenings are far less likely to happen with 16mm now than with DVDs. Clive took the initiative and was rewarded - I only wish I'd done the same in relation to some of Filmbank's features!

Posted by Clive Carmock (Member # 347) on September 23, 2011, 05:13 PM:

Hi Adrian. I was surprised I have to say. The lady I spoke to at Filmbank was very apologetic about their inability to sell to me. She even checked that the last time a Bless This House 16mm print had been rented from them was 'several' years earlier according to their database, but she explained they didn't actually own the prints. They were the property of the various distributors. She told me that the ex-Rank library was owned by Granada International but there was no point in contacting them as she had never known them to sell a print.

Not daunted I decided to set about finding out who to talk to and emailed their regional sales director appealing to their better judgement. Explaining that the prints had been sitting with Filmbank, unused for years, that this was an old title. Copies on Video/DVD were easily bought but it would make the day for this one film collector to have a 16mm copy, that has earned them nothing over the past few years.

A few days later I had an email back from their film Services manager telling me they had already recalled a 16mm print of the film from Filmbank, that they hadn't checked it so if I wanted it it would be in an 'unchecked' state. They would need to draw up a contract which they posted to me for signature, basically I had to agree not to use the print for any commercial gain, not attempt to copy the picture or soundtrack, and not to sell the print. The contract was not a standard document - appeared to be prepared for this one occasion.

If I agreed to that the print was mine for £50.

I duly sent them a cheque and the signed contract and a few days later a good quality print of the film arrived. Few slices in the first reel, but colour was great and all in all in very good condition.

It was a one off of course but nevertheless I managed to get 16mm copy to go alongside my (now fading) Powell 4x400ft Super 8mm copy.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on September 28, 2011, 07:29 PM:

Clive - thanks for the insight, what an extraordinary story! Staff at Filmbank must have been amazed too. £50 seems a surprisingly good price; I'm sure that the last time I hired a print from Filmbank in 2004, it cost me more than that, once the carriage and insurance was included. I wish Granada had then thought "Perhaps we can sell all of them for £50 each!"

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on September 29, 2011, 04:41 AM:

Nice to read all the above as I spent a happy evening last week looking through all my old 16mm hire catalogues fetching back a few memories. Seem to remember one guy years ago heard they were skipping prints after guillotining and spent some time sifting through them splicing films back together at home.

The old hire catalogues make very interesting reading don’t they Adrian from the likes of Watsofilms, Golden Films and more. My father used to hire from Watsofilms regularly and his recollection was of remaking splices more than anything which was a story he told that always tickled me. During wartime he had his Pathe 17.5 sound projector converted to 16mm to show public info films and he used to supplement these with a comedy film probably to help keep spirits up in WW2.
Carry on collecting. [Cool]

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2