8mm Forum: A Star Wars Example of Supply and Demand?

This is topic A Star Wars Example of Supply and Demand? 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=001688

Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on September 28, 2017, 12:36 PM:

I have been curious to observe recently on Ebay UK the varying prices that a full length 'scope print of Star Wars can fetch in various formats.

A 35mm 'scope with Dolby sound recently fetched £607

However,

A 16mm 'scope,Mylar print has just sold for £1312

At first, one would assume that the superior 35mm copy would have been far more expensive than the 16mm. Then take into consideration many people have 16mm as opposed to 35mm (does anyone have a figure?)and one can possibly see the justification of the higher price on the smaller format.Let's not even talk Super 8 (for once).
Any comments?

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on September 28, 2017, 01:55 PM:

One more: November, 2015

Star Wars: 16mm, more than a little faded, got the dollar equivalent a tad over £2800. (A friend of mine was on the income end of this auction, and he was pleasantly surprised!)

-sometimes it's OK if it makes no sense!

(There may be no sense to be made!)

Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on September 28, 2017, 02:41 PM:

Good on him,Steve.

If people are prepared to pay that sort of money then so be it. It is when the starting price on Ebay is ridiculously high that really can irritate.

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on September 28, 2017, 02:54 PM:

If I remember right the starting bid on this was $19.99: you get a couple of toppings or delivery you can easily spend that on a pizza!

It's so natural to take a whole bunch of sales and try to fit a trend to them, but there's this delightful randomness that just defies all meaning.

More than once I've seen something I liked and put up the minimum bid ("It'll NEVER go for this little."), and I win the thing. The sharks just weren't off the beach that day, but it may not stop them next week.

It pays to remember when the guy that's so crazed for a title he's willing to dig into his kid's college fund actually gets the thing, he's out of the picture. The following week he's home enjoying his print and he doesn't care if another just like it is available today.

-on the other had, when at least TWO collectors like this collide, it's the perfect storm. (for the seller...not so much their college age kids.)

For myself, I've taken the personal pledge not to bid on optical "Grizzly Adams" until Osi gets his!

Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on September 28, 2017, 05:57 PM:

Steve - Commenting on your third paragraph, I experienced this recently. I put a bid on a classic Cagney film that I didn't think I had a hope in hell of grabbing at around £70 but hey presto! I won! I thought it would go for double!
Then today, I was chasing another one which was standing at around £50. I bid pretty much the same....another classic film.....Did I win this time? No chance. £155

Just shows there is no significant pattern to bidding nowadays.

As far as "grizzly" goes, it is not necessarily on my "wanted" list and if it surfaced on Ebay UK, it would be a quick private mail to Osi to let him know. I,like yourself, would steer clear of this one as we know just how much Osi wants it. However, if it came up at Blackpool I would get it, watch it, then another quick PM to Osi...!

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on September 28, 2017, 10:02 PM:

I've seen "Grizzly" prints a couple of times and E-mailed Osi. At least once he answered "Thanks, but I've already had that print!".

When it comes to film auctions in general: it's a unique moment in time. What's available, how it's being offered, who wants it and why and who among the who is even paying attention at the moment. Maybe the most rabid collector after a given title had to send all his film money to a roofer or a mechanic or a plumber and he's out of contention for now.

-just too many variables to ever figure out what might happen.

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on September 29, 2017, 06:38 AM:

supply & demand!!
I think this sale was nuts as the colour was red! What is the point of watching a red film, or was this simply a stars wars collector just wanting a cinema copy of the untouched 1977 version i wonder. I will never understand a film collector or movie fan being content watching a red image. It certainly doesn't work for us im afraid. I get annoyed when one of our print starts to show the early signs of fade. [Wink]

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on September 29, 2017, 08:09 AM:

It was nuts, but it was fun to watch!

-kept things pretty lively here for a couple of days:

Star Wars on 16mm

There's this thing called "patina" which antique collectors appreciate. It's rust, wear, color fading: they say it gives a piece character. Maybe if you consider a reel of film "vintage memorabilia", you actually want red fading!

-it's not like they're ever going to watch the thing.

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on September 29, 2017, 08:56 PM:

Interesting comments above, and Tom you are absolutely right...I have a 16mm Scope print of "Star Wars", had it for about 20 years. The last time I watched it, the film had turned red. I wont sell the film, but will scrap it instead "I have been talking about that for a while"...time to act and keep the reels for something else. Although its not worth projecting anymore, it really needs to be taken out of circulation for good. I will also be looking at other films soon, any that have gone totally red will meet a similar fate.

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on September 30, 2017, 05:20 AM:

Good shout there Graham, fully agree, you are also saving someone from wasting there cash as there are plenty of good copies around on both 8 and 16mm and i am sure also 35. [Wink]

[ October 11, 2019, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: Tom Photiou ]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on September 30, 2017, 05:45 AM:

If prints of my own had turned absolute red, and I was looking to offload, then I don't think I'd scrap them so long as they are myler prints, but I would simply look to pass them on to another film lover for the price of the reels only.

Many still get pleasure from viewing red prints and therefore who am I to decide they are beyond their serviceable life?

Obviously for prints like these on acetate, then as they would also be prone to VS as time moves along now, therefore then, I'd scrap this type and keep the reels for my own collection.

At the end of the day, if people can enjoy monochrome prints, made up only of shades of black, grey and white and therefore looking nothing like a realistic recreation of real life through a lens,..
Then why can't shades of red, pink and white be tolerated to bring about a similar mindset and adoration?

Again, it's not for myself to decide they never could so far as what is considered acceptable viewing material so long as the said film is well cared for and therefore fit for purpose.

Personally, I'd be more inclined to remove heavily scratched and damaged prints from circulation, even on LPP, than I ever would decent prints that look pristine aside from the fade to them.

These are the type that are truly ruined for good.

[ September 30, 2017, 09:25 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on September 30, 2017, 11:00 AM:

A red print can be made more tolerable to watch by projecting through a blue filter.
I would never scrap any print unless it had bad v.s.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on September 30, 2017, 04:30 PM:

I agree with Graham here.

Just scrap a faded or damaged print.

So called collectors will abolish you for saying so, but try to sell or even give away such stuff and suddenly most are amazingly quiet...

Bin it...it was designed and built for a different era if it has faded...

I sent a slightly faded, well run 16mm print abroad at my own loss recently just because I couldn't face destroying it and thought it was possibly still enjoyable?

I really do hope that the new owner enjoys it (genuine, no disrespect, and TOTALLY my own choice, and really do hope that it is decent entertainment) but would I bother again, hell no...bin.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on September 30, 2017, 05:02 PM:

As said Rob, everones tolerance levels of acceptable are completely different.

That is why for me, it is simply a case of whether a print is physically up to running and if enough of the image still exists without faces being disfigured etc by the inclusion of horrible green tram lines and the likes.

If the film passes clear on both of the above,i would gladly allow a new owner deem it fit for purpose.

Once they're gone, they're gone forever.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on October 01, 2017, 07:57 AM:

I really do appreciate what you are saying, Andrew, but there are gleaming new digital versions of most movies out there, also made by people that really do care about quality.

I tried to almost give away several 16mm prints at a convention once, and to be honest all I saw was a dealer buying them up at my honest and cheap prices, then re-selling them at ridiculous prices.

Of course, said person passed on the pink prints, as did everyone else.

It did damage my faith in the film collecting business, for sure.

That said, we all know the really great and trustworthy dealers out there.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on October 01, 2017, 09:54 AM:

Put into that context Rob, under those same circumstances, I'd rather had scrapped the lot. [Mad]

Posted by Robert Tucker (Member # 386) on October 01, 2017, 11:34 AM:

All depends on the subject matter and if it ever got printed again on 16mm or 35mm.

You'll find that most 35mm prints will not get a second print run depending on title. This goes the same with 16mm as well.

Hence the reason why some people choose to keep the print. As you'll never find another one of this title in your life time.

To put this in the mix you also have first aired TV prints that are very collectible even being red. Let's face it you have plenty of red Eastman prints out there. But it all boils down to the subject matter some times and title if they rarely come up often in any format.

All comes down to personal taste i guess.

Posted by Gilbert Lambert (Member # 5403) on October 01, 2017, 11:48 AM:

We all know a new print can be made if you know the way. Why bid and gamble that amount , new one can be made for lesser.

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on October 01, 2017, 02:02 PM:

A new print can be made but the cost really is very, very high.
I have seen the prices for raw stock, the work involved, it is not a cheap proposition. And of course you have to find the master material.
For me I wouldn't want a print that was red/pink, soft focus, bad sound, etc. I had those prints and I tried watching them but I couldn't take it. My mind would wander off and I would eventually just turn off the machine. Those are deal breakers for me. I would rather watch the movie on my laptop! I would never trash a print but I would either sell it or give it away. Once they are gone, they are gone as was said before.
If i had the space I would love to get into 35mm. I saw a NEW print of "Enter the Dragon" Scope, the whole works, the new updated version with the additional footage with Bruce talking with the head monk...it sold for $2000! That to me is a bargain. Wish I would of seen it. I would of bought it on the spot and waited till I found a 35mm projector! [Smile]

And Star Wars on 35mm? Forget it. That would be incredible.
T2-$1500. And you know the quality of it. That would be $300 cheaper than the Super 8 print. http://www.ebay.com/itm/P0182-TERMINATOR-2-JUDGMENT-DAY-1991-35mm-motion-picture-film-print-FEATURE-/263197644761?hash=item3d47cd57d9%3Ag%3Ac9gAAOSwLmZZtJDs&nma=true&si=pOQyzgOvLzM vL%252Ff6yA2RlnkAqlw%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on October 01, 2017, 02:51 PM:

My feelings exactly Rob I am not prepared to give them away for someone further down the line to make a killing money wise over.

Although I am not saying that all film collectors are crooks, there are certainly some out there, and I have come across them. I am sure we all have, that would take advantage of some poor sucker selling this badly faded rubbish.

As Andrew says above..."Once they're gone, they're gone forever".
and that's exactly what I want.

Alan you could look at a portable 35mm, I saw one that a fellow forum member here has and its a stunner. With arms that attach for large reels, reverse scanning reader, Xenon lamp etc etc. It could sit on a kitchen table..a strong one.. [Smile]

..a real beauty.

The next time I see him in a few weeks, I will ask if he can put some photos of it up for you [Cool]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on October 01, 2017, 03:04 PM:

I did say those words Graham, but not quite in the same context as you appear to be meaning it here.

From my own perspective, all i was meaning, that as a result of the above statement, all the more reason as to why to think long and hard about scrapping any.

What we know now of course, is that from even the grubbiest and oldest of film images, archivists of film can now clean up these images frame by frame to look like new for digital restoration work.

So for rare 16mm /35mm original release footage or even some amateur 8mm footage, these faded scratched and worn out images can often unlock vital pieces of historical value for both our earliest and rarest commercial films as well as insights to places and people of the day throughout history and throughout our world.

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on December 04, 2017, 09:52 AM:

I have binned more 16mm and Super 8mm faded to red prints recently with more to go. I tried them with a filter but was not convinced to keep them any longer as this merely flattened the already soft definition even more.

Most of them were musicals, westerns and war movies.

I saw no reason to pass them on just for some others to sell on at a huge overpriced profit.

They were not even worth saving for posterity because most of them were 8mm cutdowns from your average Hollywood fodder.

The titles are readily available in much superior picture quality on DVD/Blu-Ray discs

The negs are still safely stored away for future use anyway so these inferior Super 8mm prints are no loss to future generations.

However I may just sell off my remaining faded prints on at hugely inflated prices on ebay to fund my forthcoming conversion to the 16mm gauge.

[Big Grin]

Posted by Dave Groves (Member # 4685) on December 05, 2017, 02:31 PM:

In 1979 I purchased a used print of the Halas & Bachelor cartoon 'The Candlemaker'. The colour was lovely and ran it many times. Now my favourite cartoon is red with not a hint of colour. I ran it in my Christmas show last night and said to the audience 'See if you can find something wrong with this cartoon'. From an audience of 35, three mentioned the colour, and when told they were correct, they said they thought it was nice that way!!! Personally I won't show faded prints but where would I find a nice colour copy now. And, if I did, my days of buying prints are pretty much at an end. We all get there eventually. Watching b/w is seeing what exists. Watching faded film, my mind keeps telling me I'm not seeing what I should. I feel cheated, even watching my degraded cartoon is disappointing compared with what it used to be.

Posted by Rodney Bourke (Member # 1646) on October 03, 2019, 07:45 AM:

16mm STAR WARS in Fuji Colour and Scope on ebay

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/16mm-Feature-Film-STAR-WARS-1977-Uncut-Theatrical-Scope-GORGEOUS-PRINT/333344844135?hash=item4d9ce6a967:g:psgAAOSwSxtdkP7n&frcectupt=true

Posted by Can Sanalan (Member # 5988) on October 07, 2019, 03:35 AM:

WOW!!
That final price!!!! [Eek!]

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on October 07, 2019, 03:42 AM:

To save you time:-
Sold for US $6,299.00 with 27 bids.

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on October 07, 2019, 02:18 PM:

You could surely source a new copy somewhere in the States for much less than that.

Crackers.

Pass me the £6 Blu Ray please, special goings on or not.

Best Mark.

Posted by Nantawat Kittiwarakul (Member # 6050) on October 07, 2019, 07:29 PM:

Hmmmmmmm

How much does it cost to strike a new 16mm print?
My wild guess it around a few grand, but probably less than 6K... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on October 10, 2019, 07:02 PM:

Surprising where "Grizzly" shows up! [Smile]

Now, these days, even if i can't watch it, I would LOVE a 35MM print of it, (Grizzly), but I really do thank all those on and off the forum that have let me kno about the random "Grizzlys" wandering about.

I think Melvin and Steve are quite correct about that "perfect storm" scenario, (and don't we sellers love it when those rare circumstances pop up, eh?), but it's a damned nuisciance to us small potato collectors.

... and really, it's only reserved for those very few big titles that defy "conventions". Star Wars is one of them, no doubt among the very few, as people from all walks of life, who would think that a projector is something to make pizza with, will still want a piece of "history" when it comes to they're beloved STAR WARS!

I mean, there are other well loved and rare titles, mostly those very good Derann, Kempski and otherwise scope features that can fetch upwards of 500.00 to possibly a thousand, but STAR WARS is that anamoly that defies categorization.

quite frankly, I was surprised to see that the super 8 scope print of "Forbidden Planet actually went for what it did as, from what i have read on this forum, it wasn't really put into production on super 8 and was only relegated to a few "test print" and so, incredibly rare.

Another incredibly rare print is "Duck Soup" (as a feature).

Oh, one last thing ...

New "glossy" versions of these classics often have "tweaked" color and are often NOT the original color palette that we remember. I had a U.S. bluray of "Neverending Story" and the whole image was very off color, the non U.S. printing (by a different company) had much more realistic colors more true to the original release.

... but I have seen this many times over, far too often, where people these days, in order to make the film more "palette-able" to modern color blind people (made that way by modern color techniques), so that they won't be un-nerved by the presence of very real, natural colors!

Posted by Rodney Bourke (Member # 1646) on October 22, 2019, 06:46 AM:

Also in Star Wars on 16mm

see now on ebay

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/16mm-Film-THE-MAKING-OF-STAR-WARS-1977-Bonus-EMPIRE-STRIKES-BACK-Trailer/233372269625?hash=item3656123c39:g:I1AAAOSw4pJdqQMi

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2