8mm Forum: Who says film is dead??

This is topic Who says film is dead?? 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=001511

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on October 27, 2016, 04:22 PM:

Look at the price this one fetched!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/162247738217?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on October 27, 2016, 05:17 PM:

unbelievable

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on October 27, 2016, 05:21 PM:

What is unbelievable to my mind, is that even at these prices, the buyer still has to tolerate strained perf in places as well as the odd emulsion scratch! [Frown]

Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on October 27, 2016, 05:52 PM:

nice to see 16mm fetching decent money like super 8 seems to do

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on October 27, 2016, 06:04 PM:

Agreed David, but it does surprise me whilever films constantly surface with defects just from actually running the films. [Confused]

The prices of Super 8mm feature films varies drastically, once a defect has been highlighted.

In Super 8mm land, it's always, and all about condition, condition, condition.
Only then do we see extremely high resale prices for certain films.

[ October 27, 2016, 07:17 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on October 27, 2016, 06:51 PM:

[Eek!]

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on October 28, 2016, 02:30 AM:

I am just thinking of all the films I could buy for £1809.84.

Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on October 28, 2016, 03:04 AM:

you had best come to blackpool Maurice there will be plenty there

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on October 28, 2016, 03:07 AM:

I see that it's just been relisted due to a non payer. It will be interesting to see what it fetches next time.

Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on October 28, 2016, 04:04 AM:

I personally think that these films that are fetching this kind of money are being run up maybe by friends etc

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on October 28, 2016, 04:15 AM:

You're probably spot on there David!

Equally, how would know you had a non paying customer so soon after auction has ended?
Only two reasons, one being that the buyer said he had made some kind of mistake,but then waited until auction end to say as much?
The second, well those are rather more sinister thoughts sadly.

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on October 28, 2016, 04:30 AM:

Currently 2 bids for Jurassic Park at £102, with six days to go.

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on October 28, 2016, 06:00 AM:

I'm sure that some items are 'run up' but I can't believe that anyone would chance their arm to do it to that sort of price - would they? - Madness.

Posted by Stuart Reid (Member # 1460) on October 28, 2016, 07:23 AM:

I seriously considered bidding on that as JP is one of my all time favourite movies. But SIX HUNDRED QUID? I'd want Spielberg to sit next to me and give a director's commentary for that money!

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on October 28, 2016, 09:18 AM:

It will fetch a whole lot more than that Stuart, that's for sure!

Maybe not £1800, but more than £600

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on October 28, 2016, 09:23 AM:

It was available full length on Super 8 at around £300 mark so there would be better prints around.

Posted by Stuart Reid (Member # 1460) on October 28, 2016, 09:37 AM:

Mike, surely if the Super 8 prints are from a 35mm print, and this is an original theatrical print, this one is going to have superior definition and saturation?

Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on October 28, 2016, 10:26 AM:

" Re-Listed due to non paying bidder "

I very much hope the seller reported the "buyer" to Ebay....

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on October 28, 2016, 02:38 PM:

Hi Stuart

The super 8 prints that came from Derann. I presume they used a 35mm negative. Print quality was on par with Predator and Aliens etc. The print being advertised looks good I assume a 16mm print has been struck for either foreign markets or for hire to either small cinemas or use on oil rigs etc. I am surprised that a film as late as 1993 was made on 16mm.

Mike

Posted by Clyde Miles (Member # 4032) on October 28, 2016, 04:25 PM:

16mm prints made it as late as 2006-7.

Posted by Stuart Reid (Member # 1460) on October 29, 2016, 01:54 PM:

Aha I had no idea Derann struck prints of JP, I was under the assumption they were imports. In that case I shall have to hunt one down.

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on October 29, 2016, 06:07 PM:

In 1994 I worked for a film lab and we use to make 16mm prints for Disney. While I was there I remember they were working on "Pocahontas". They usually did 2 types of prints. One standard and then one that was labeled "Xenon" Which was timed/color corrected differently for use for the Armed Forces I believe. They couldn't get the sharpness right on a few prints so I had to walk to the dumpster and then throw the soft focus prints in there and let them unspool so that no one would come and take them out of there. I also did that for a few films like a 35mm print of "The Blob". And sadly, numerous others.

Posted by Gerald Santana (Member # 2362) on October 29, 2016, 10:38 PM:

Considering that these great titles are far more scare than any automobile of the same value, a seller today should be grateful that the hobbyist and the collector are two different buyers. And I can assure you as both a buyer and a seller, that there are hardly any friends when the hammer comes down on those last few seconds of the auction.

What I can say is that there are buyers out there for 16mm where cost does not seem to be a matter because they know how scarce the film is. These people are real, money is no object and are very, very competitive. And then there is the hobbyist, who can only cringe at the closing price...so close yet so far. Glad to see that this hobby can provide happiness to so many, and on the other hand such a frustrating venture when dozens are hunting for the same prize.

Posted by Dave Groves (Member # 4685) on October 30, 2016, 04:21 AM:

'when dozens are hunting for the same prize'. Those last few words sum up the whole situation that causes prices to make some of us gasp. There are folk for whom money is no object to getting what they want. Great for sellers methinks.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on October 30, 2016, 05:41 AM:

Indeed! [Wink]

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on October 30, 2016, 02:16 PM:

The Jurassic Park is relisted due to non paying bidder.

I am wondering why seller did not use second chance offer to the second highest bidder for a quick sale. It will only $1 different.

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on October 30, 2016, 04:12 PM:

Good point Winbert. Makes you wonder doesn't it? or are we being cynical.

Posted by Clyde Miles (Member # 4032) on October 30, 2016, 05:04 PM:

most likely did, but backed out

Posted by David Guest (Member # 2791) on October 30, 2016, 05:12 PM:

why did he not sell to the underbidder

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on October 31, 2016, 04:38 PM:

"Non-paying bidder" as a reason for resale is an odd thing to do - especially at the final price - since you can offer other bidders Second Chance Offers.

Unless they declined...

For that much, you could buy a really nice cinema video projector...

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on November 01, 2016, 05:50 AM:

The "Film Collecting" scene is getting as crazy as the "Comic Collecting" scene when it comes to "rarity values" of a specific
item.

Some people could just be buying them as an investment for the future with no real love or passion for the thing itself.

The point is that they could be shooting themselves in the foot in the long term if interest wanes over a period of time in the said item.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on November 01, 2016, 06:04 AM:

You're right of course David, except to say we have been hearing these very same things said since the dawn of the projected DVD with even a modicum of any success.

Even Derek himself advised that if people had valuable 8mm collections, now was the time to sell them, when he was selling the XV-Z1E.

The thing is, that was said at the end of the last century and nothing's changed since...except the good stuff keeps going up and up in resale value?

The only time things will drastically change, is once all the projection equipment no longer can be maintained.

We are not quite at that stage yet thankfully, but the day will come unless people obtain spares machines etc etc.

I don't believe the vast vast majority of high priced films sell only to anorak collectors who just wrap them in bubble wrap and shove them in a cupboard.
I still believe nearly all titles are purchased to use with maybe the exception of the trekkies on the Star Wars, Dr Who stuff.

Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on November 01, 2016, 02:42 PM:

Not only films getting crazy. Disney VHS tapes too.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on November 01, 2016, 03:48 PM:

Good, I've got a loft full of them. Get em eBay quick! [Smile]

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on November 01, 2016, 06:17 PM:

Glancing through silly bay at super 8 sales it is pretty obvious that the hype in prices relate primarily to science fiction / horror with picture art. They are a few clowns on who obviously haven't a clue for example Sherlock Holmes Smarter Brother with buy it now of £45.00 😄😄😄 I remember being at a mini convention and somebody at the buy and sell stall couldn't get £1.00 eventually giving it away.

There is a strong memorabilia market out there. It may be the next niche market for rich people to speculate on buying. Even 10 years ago a lot of sales I had were definitely to people who collected buy never watched what they bought.

You would expect projector prices to be rising but they are pretty stable and reasonable to buy.

Sad thing is a lot of titles are going to priced out of the reach of real collectors I.e Hammer Universal Horror Hitchcock Spielberg and Disney. Etc

Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on November 07, 2016, 10:12 AM:

Jurassic Park sold on its 2nd attempt for £1070.00

No... did not put the decimal place in the wrong position......!

Posted by Brad Kimball (Member # 5) on November 07, 2016, 11:27 AM:

Why would the miltary utiluze 16mm when they could easily just use a digital projector with a dvd player or a laptop? Why would they bother with what they could easily consider a cumbersome set up?

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on November 08, 2016, 03:15 AM:

Only reason I could think of is that a valve (tube) 16mm might still work after a Electro-magnetic pulse from a nuclear attack. If there was anyone around to watch and some power available :-)

Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on November 08, 2016, 05:51 AM:

Brian What a lovely thought. Let's hope it's not Dr Strangelove. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Ronald Green (Member # 5655) on November 08, 2016, 07:56 PM:

I always get a kick out of sellers posting, "It seems to be in good condition; I don't have a projector to run the film". And then they don't offer you any kind of guarantee. Interesting.

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on November 17, 2016, 05:10 AM:

I will tell you this guys.
If such prices for a print becomes the "norm" for
any print on any film gauge I am outa this hobby
for good after around 50 years of collecting.

I kid ye not.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on November 17, 2016, 05:16 AM:

It already is sadly David.

Only last week, a well described print, riddled in emulsion scratches sold for £680 on Super 8mm!!!

If this type of thing was all that was out there, I too would have already collected my last film!

Thankfully, this isn't the case, and quite why anyone would stump up these ludicrous sums of money for a print in this condition, is completely and utterly beyond me???????

Posted by Dave Groves (Member # 4685) on November 17, 2016, 10:45 AM:

In a fit of madness I bid for a newsreel where the seller states 'No returns'.I won't usually entertain such sellers but it contained something I thought worth buying. Sanity has returned and the bids will continue without any input from me. Why on earth would someone put such a rider on a sale. I get very uneasy when sellers are unwilling to take something back.

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on November 17, 2016, 11:43 AM:

Dave It is very understandable. In the words of Max Bygraves ' I wanna tell you a story' -
I was told this from a very reliable source. A seller sold something related to our common interest, let's say a film, I can't remember what it was. He sold it to a buyer in France and offered returns. He received a return parcel from the buyer and upon opening it found that it contained a rotten apple.
He complained to eBay and even supplied a photo of the package and the contents, but eBay upheld the buyers claim that the item sold had been the item returned.
Now that does not surprise me knowing eBays bias towards buyers and little protection offered to sellers, but also not forgetting there are more than a few unscrupulous buyers out there.
Here endeth the lesson.
By the way, I believe Max Bygraves retired to your part of the world did he not?

Posted by Robert Tucker (Member # 386) on November 17, 2016, 01:05 PM:

Now just imagine how much an original print on 35mm would go for. With Super 8 prints unless they are in mint condition as new It's not worth chancing especially as the format is so small in the first place. Which is one major draw back in purchasing and collecting second hand films these days.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on November 17, 2016, 01:23 PM:

Luckily on Super 8mm in particular, there are plenty of prints that ARE in like new condition.

It always helps on S8 that none of these prints were produced to run commercially, well apart from 70's Soho prints perhaps!😂

Posted by Robert Tucker (Member # 386) on November 17, 2016, 03:17 PM:

But unfortunately on Super 8 your are limited in what you can collect title wise. As well as some titles only having a limited print run.

Along with new projectors being impossible to find in any format. Only time will tell.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on November 17, 2016, 03:30 PM:

All very true Robert but projectors should be ok for many many decades yet so long as the guys who wish to use them back them up well with all the necessary spares or spare machines.

Most of the electronics still remain readily available even if in some cases certain IC chipsets will have to be sourced from new old stock suppliers.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2