8mm Forum: Am I reading this wrong or is it me?

8mm Forum

my profile | my password | search | faq | register | forum home

next oldest topic

next newest topic

»	8mm Forum » General Yak » Am I reading this wrong or is it me? (Page 2)

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Am I reading this wrong or is it me?

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted January 28, 2019 05:52 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Thats true but back then the fade issue was a lot less common. These days every other print seems to have fade. Aside that, derann would always refund if there was a problem. Most importantly, as a seller, i think its important for your own standing to list as good and accurate a description as possible.
As it happens, ive just looked through an old derann list and they did mention fade on one or two.

[ January 28, 2019, 07:37 AM: Message edited by: Tom Photiou ]

| IP: Logged

Dominique De Bast
Film God

Posts: 4486
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jun 2013

posted January 28, 2019 06:56 AM

Email Dominique De Bast

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

There is no way I could regard a faded print as "mint" or even as "good". I never got a pinkish or redish print from Derann.

--------------------
Dominique

| IP: Logged

Robert Crewdson
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1031
From: UK
Registered: Jun 2013

posted January 28, 2019 07:39 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I have a few Super 8 films that I only projected the once, then when I got them out years later they had turned red. Projected only once then lain on a shelf doing nothing.

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted January 28, 2019 07:39 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Nor me Dominique. The one thing about the dealers is that you are protected to a point. (Not always i admit). But although ebay states they help you, i have found a problem twice with this. Overall though, it's generally OK with no problems. I was always dead against ebay in the the early days but i guess if you cant beat them you join them, but you do it as best and accurate as you can [Wink]

[Wink]

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 28, 2019 02:30 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote:
There is no way I could regard a faded print as "mint"

Dom... "mint" is a physical condition meaning it had never been run on a projector.

A mint film might have faded depending on what stock and the processing method used. I have once opened a sealed packed film (= mint) and it has faded.

If I took the below example you might understand clearly:

A mint vinyl (record) is when it has never been tocuhed by a needle. But can we assure the vinyl does not have pops and has a good sound? no we can't... pops can be produced by bad vinyl material or pressing method. So when we see a bright, glossy, unscratch vinyl and believe it has never been played, physically we say it as a mint vinyl (whether it is sealed or not). Same thing to film.

cheers,

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Douglas Meltzer
Moderator

Posts: 4554
From: New York, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 28, 2019 05:24 PM

Email Douglas Meltzer

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I agree with Adrian & Michael that sellers have for years used the term "condition" to describe not color, but whether the film has scratches/splices/wear. Brian's screenshots clearly show the state of the film's color.
Both Steve Osborne & Barry Atwood have separate ratings for print quality & color on their sales lists that I find very useful.

Doug

--------------------
I think there's room for just one more film.....

| IP: Logged

Dominique De Bast
Film God

Posts: 4486
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jun 2013

posted January 28, 2019 05:40 PM

Email Dominique De Bast

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Winbert, what's the point to know a film or a record has never been, unsealed if it's faded (for the film) or scratched for the record) ? If I buy a film "mint", or "good", I don't expect it to be faded. Others may not think the same way but since Tom asked us our personnal opinions, I gave mine
[Big Grin]

[Big Grin]

[ January 28, 2019, 11:43 PM: Message edited by: Dominique De Bast ]

--------------------
Dominique

| IP: Logged

Graham Ritchie
Film God

Posts: 4001
From: New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2006

posted January 28, 2019 09:42 PM

Email Graham Ritchie

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Dominique

I remember years ago a seller in Australia was selling a 16mm Scope print of Oliver. I spoke to the person on the phone, he told me the print was in excellent condition. I asked him what the color was like?, he replied "faded". I said how can you say its in excellent condition when its FADED he said its free of scratches and splices [Roll Eyes]

[Roll Eyes]

As you can guess I never bought it, In my view condition must include the color. I know of people that have been caught out by those kind of dealings in the past, in the end moving over to Video Projection totally instead.

Color has to be part of the print condition, to say otherwise is just playing with words to make a sale $$$$$$.

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 29, 2019 12:28 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

There are a lot of cases where films have faded since the very first time (perhaps due to the bad negatives) ... so this means it was sold on that condition. They are mint prints but faded.

The expectation to include color condition as part of the description is because today we are only wishing an excellent color film to be in our collection (as Derann's or Red Fox print). However, please remember that was not the point of selling film in 1970s.

I have some DVDs which have really bad mastering that do not match with today's Bluray standard. But I cannot used today's standard for judging old stuff that were made a long time ago.

I am afraid this what we are talking now.... expecting all films from 40 years ago to be the latest Derann's or Red Fox's quality... [Wink]

[Wink]

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Dominique De Bast
Film God

Posts: 4486
From: Brussels, Belgium
Registered: Jun 2013

posted January 29, 2019 12:42 AM

Email Dominique De Bast

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Winbert, you mean that in your country they sold new faded prints 40 years ago ? If so, I understand better your point of view but for sure, in Belgium (and in France), new meant new.

--------------------
Dominique

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 29, 2019 12:49 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Dom, yes that is exactly. Some films have faded from the beginning. Indonesia has never printed commercial films so our films were imported from the States.

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Graham Ritchie
Film God

Posts: 4001
From: New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2006

posted January 29, 2019 02:02 AM

Email Graham Ritchie

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Winbert

All the new films 1970s etc here were imported either from the UK or the US..Ken Films, Universal 8 etc.

I bought them new and none had color fade. Many of those prints bought then are now fading or faded completely. There is no way they were like that when they were new, if they were nobody would have ever spent the money on them as they were expensive at the time.

I don't agree that a film is mint or even in good condition if its badly faded...its junk. Color, sound , the hole thing is what I would call its "condition" and any part of the film that's not right must determine its overall description for sale.

To describe a film as mint condition or good condition without taking into account the color is misleading, after all its the image we are watching on the screen that counts the most.

| IP: Logged

Bill Phelps
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1482
From: USA
Registered: Jan 2009

posted January 29, 2019 02:16 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I look at film condition and color quality (even image quality) as separate things. I wouldn’t want one overall description for a film, I prefer them described separately.

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 29, 2019 03:04 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote:

All the new films 1970s etc here were imported either from the UK or the US..Ken Films, Universal 8 etc.

Graham, I am talking from my own experience plus some people (either on Ebay or film forums) have several times stated "The colors have faded (or pale) from the beginning (or since I bought them), it is perhaps due to the negative"

So I am sure I am not alone.

quote:
There is no way they were like that when they were new, if they were nobody would have ever spent the money on them as they were expensive at the time.

So why (some) Niles and Collectors Club were still sold well... with those dupey quality? Because there was a market for that, I am sure!

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Graham Ritchie
Film God

Posts: 4001
From: New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2006

posted January 29, 2019 06:31 PM

Email Graham Ritchie

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Hi Winbert

I totally agree that the source at printing is important. Some films even new like "Born Free" were lacking color. Ken films and Universal 8 in general were very good "at the time".

Bill Davison's "Bootlace Cinema" for years would grade the films he reviewed with editing, colour and sound. The word fade never came up. Sadly in time, many of those films he reviewed such as Star Wars, Buck Rogers, JAWS, and so on, would start to fade long after "Movie Maker" ceased, some if not many, have now gone completely red, but no one new at the time that this was going to happen.

Its a pity though, as when I bought "Star Wars" brand new when it was released it looked great. I think it got the title "package movie of the year"... now look at it [Frown]

[Frown]

..faded into the sunset.

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 29, 2019 07:32 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote:
Ken films and Universal 8 in general were very good "at the time".

Our taste as well our judgement did grow according to the time. Our brains (read: eyes) are educated by the enhance of technology. We do remember the very first time Betamax (or VHS) released we were amazed with the picture quality. Same thing with the LaserDisc, and then DVD.. and now Bluray.

If we were now given those Betamax/VHS/LD.... we will be laughing loudly, why we watch this kind of crap pictures. But that what the technology at that time and they were sufficient enough to our needs.

Same thing with 8mm, when "Born Free" was released, those lack of colour was not bothering really to the audience, because the focus was different (perhaps more to the story) and we were not educated yet with 4K picture.

This is what I was telling at the very beginning, we cannot use today's (Derann or Red Fox) standard of printing to judge the old prints from 40 years ago. I am not at all against a description with screen shots or film scans. What I was emphasizing is we have to distinguish between physical condition and printing quality description. It would be more helpful if a listing have both.

The Brian Stearns' listing have had presented both, so it is fair enough to me.

Cheers,

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

David Hardy
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 955
From: Johnshaven Village , Montrose, Scotland
Registered: Jan 2015

posted January 30, 2019 10:47 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

My personal criteria for film print quality is simple.

A : No film fade.
B : No bad tramline or cross scratches.
C : No dupey or bleached looking images.
D : No poor sound quality.
E : No over abundance of splices.
F : No torn or strained perforations.
G : No severe film buckle or shrinkage.

SIMPLES !

[Smile]

[Smile]

--------------------
" My equipment's more important than your rats. "

| IP: Logged

Kevin Clark
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 978
From: Bapchild, Kent, UK
Registered: May 2004

posted January 30, 2019 11:02 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

In the interests of absolute clarity and to get the official take on what is or isn't OK to describe as 'mint' regarding cine film sales on Ebay, I sent them a question a couple of days ago as follows:

I have a question regarding the use of the term 'in mint condition' when applied to cine films (8mm / 16mm) listed for sale on Ebay.

For a cine film that is physically perfect, has no wear or scratches and looks as though it has never been projected, but upon visual inspection the colour of the film has faded over the years and it is now a pink / red colour without all the green yellow or blue colours showing.

Is it still OK to describe it as in mint condition or, if not as the colour has faded to pink / red instead of the original full colour palette, can you perhaps suggest a term to describe the film by that better suits the Ebay item description criteria please?

Thank you in advance for your advice.

Kevin Clark 28th January 2019

I received their reply today as follows:

Hello Kevin,

Thank you for contacting us. My name is Satyaki and I'll be glad to assist you further.

First of all, I appreciate your willingness to comply with the eBay policy. I've checked the details of your email and would like to confirm that "In mint condition" would be fine for use in this particular case. Please make sure that in any case you do not use "New" option as it will be the misleading term. If you still face any trouble, please create a draft of the listing and get back to us. We will assist you further.

Thanks for clarifying the issue with us. We appreciate your cooperation.

Kind regards,

Satyaki T.
eBay Trust & Safety

So there it is - from eBay's perspective those with undamaged scratch free films can indeed state them as in mint condition (but not new) even if beet red or piggy pink.

I still personally, as do others in this thread, maintain that colour fade is an important factor if using mint as the grading but everyone to their own and in this case backed up by Ebay too.

Kevin

| IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005

posted January 30, 2019 11:40 AM

Author's Homepage

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

This is an interesting topic, Tom ...

This will sound strange (as you would think that it would be the other way around), but I find that when I put actual screenshots of the object I am selling, my auctions take LONGER to sell instead of a shorter time. I really don't understand why.

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

| IP: Logged

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 30, 2019 05:07 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote:
but I find that when I put actual screenshots

Actual screen shots can also misleading due to several factors, namely: shaky camera, white balance feature (making brownish film to be ok), softener feature (making film grains are gone), camera's resolution (making scratch or notches are unseen) and also our not-calibrated screen can contribute to the wrong judgement.

For not-so-perfectionist buyers these type of screen shots are an OK because most of them just worry with pinky color. But for those who really want to have a kind like brand-new prints in their collection they may get disappointed upon receiving it.

So the fairest way is scanning (like what Brian has done). We can observe every single frames to see what is the flaws. But of course the problem of not-calibrated screen remains.

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Michael O'Regan
Film God

Posts: 3085
From: Essex, UK
Registered: Oct 2007

posted February 01, 2019 05:36 AM

Email Michael O'Regan

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

With the knowledge that, historically, print condition has been described separately from colour condition, it would just be wisest to enquire about colour separately. This is what I've always done and it's fairly straightforward. One question to the seller.

| IP: Logged

Mark Silvester
Master Film Handler

Posts: 282
From: England
Registered: Oct 2007

posted February 01, 2019 09:32 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Hi all

and what an interesting topic - having sold on a lot of 16mm and a few 8mm prints in the past. ( I left cine over 10 years ago now).

I did have some very rare and sought after titles - anyways,and actually I cannot remember ever describing a film as "mint" the closest I ever had 16mm wise was a beautiful copy of RoboCop or Godfather 3...these would certainly deserved the "mint" accolade...but I would never ever have described a 16mm or an 8mm print that was in excellent condition but faded as "mint"...I just wouldn't have done it as to me, anyway, it would have not felt right describing it as such. I would have described the the two elements separately ..it just makes sense to do so.

"Excellent original print with no VS but unfortunately suffering with fade" (then generally describe the fade level)

Thats just how I would have listed a print -just the 2 elements of condition and fade. I would not be comfortable with using the word mint at all.I mean, when would mint be actually appropriate..I would say on a brand new from the lab print.

Thats just my six-pennyworth . [Smile]

[Smile]

Mark

--------------------
Mark Silvester

| IP: Logged

Lee Mannering
Film God

Posts: 3216
From: The Projection Box
Registered: Nov 2006

posted February 01, 2019 11:09 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I'm just glad I'm here to project film it's sheer joy.

For me all the guys at Derann were the best and we will never see the like again.
Dear Steve in the US is doing wonders and the top man for new prints. Every used print is as described as well.

T-heeBay is what it is a take a chance place. Some you win some you loose that's a auction house.

| IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005

posted February 01, 2019 11:52 AM

Author's Homepage

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I agree Lee ...

There is just a magic (as far as I'm concerned) about just projecting the film, caring for it. Fortunately, my kids are really getting into it as well, which is good as, as a general rule, most of my prints these day (color) are low fade film stock and the few that are not (mostly opticals) are cold stored to maintain the color for quite a long time, so that when they take over someday, they'll be able to enjoy them for a loong time after most folks will just remember them as a beautiful but distant memory.

(sigh, that almost makes me moody) [Frown]

[Frown]

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted February 03, 2019 10:33 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Kevin, thanks for taking the trouble to contact ebay in this matter. The people who run ebay obviously know very little about our hobby. There main thing is making money [Big Grin]

[Big Grin]

Having said that, i do agree with many points in here, as a buyer mint is a term i try not to use any more, good / very good or acceptable. But, i would not buy anything unless i knew how the colour was. I personally think it's vital.

I myself am listing three items tonight, i am going to list them slightly differently to what I've done in the past so any feedback from fellow collectors would be helpful, good or bad.

Pictures can sometimes be misleading. I've taken screenshots of films which are good but due to the fact im using a cheap digital camera with the flash off it often makes good films look like they have fade, it also can make excellent films look sort of average so i always state they are for a guide only, also, i think this is the important thing about a good honest description on all three aspects, print condition, sound and colour. This is only what i think mind! [Wink]

[Wink]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Move Topic

Delete Topic

next oldest topic

next newest topic

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2