8mm Forum: Fists of Fury Scope Ebay 35mm..?

This is topic Fists of Fury Scope Ebay 35mm..? in forum 8mm 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=1;t=007025

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on April 10, 2012, 09:19 PM:

Wow wow and wow! I wish I had a 35mm Projector for this one.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=bruce+lee&_sacat=63821&_odkw=dragon&_osacat=63821

And in IB tech. Sweet. Does someone want to purchase this and we can make a Super 8 reduction?

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on April 10, 2012, 09:45 PM:

Isn't 35 mm owned by studio hence cannot be sold?

Last week also there was a recent James bond 007 movie on Ebay.

What are the rules now regarding 35mm prints?

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on April 11, 2012, 01:37 PM:

All I can say Winbert is that there are a lot of people out there
that collect 35mm,whether it's against the law,I don't honestly
know.There was a time in the UK when you weren't supposed
to own 16mm prints of features.Like I said in an earlier post,the powers that be in the film studios
take a dim view of anyone owning prints,but aren't behind
the door when they want a copy from collectors when it suits.
Lets be quite plain,if it wasn't for collectors,then a lot of films
would have been lost forever.Some people have this vision that everything is archived and looked after,and it just isn't so.My
attitude has always been,if the studios can't look after the prints
then theres always someone who will.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on April 11, 2012, 03:51 PM:

Hi Hugh,

I see your point.

One last thing, when a print is said "IB Teh", does it mean about the way of Lab to process this print or the way of this film was shot?

I only knew that Technicolor is about three strip film which very very expensive tehnic.

Can you explain, please.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on April 11, 2012, 04:18 PM:

IB implies the actual printing, Winbert, to the best of my knowledge.
It means "imbibition".

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on April 11, 2012, 07:46 PM:

As far as I understand Winbert it is in the actual printing,which
was supposed to ensure that the colours of the film would be
permanent, As the technicolour camera records the image on specialy coated B/W stock to register the three different colours, So prints that were struck from this process were deemed to be the best,as it gives more control over individual colours unfortunately recent evidence has shown that IB Tech prints,
being printed on acetate
stock,are more prone to vinegar syndrome,especially if kept in
tight containers.I myself have a number of IBs and have made
the cans able to breathe.Funnily enough I know you fella's on
here love "Star Wars",and that was one of the last big features
to be made in IB Tech in the UK before we sold the system to
the Chinese,who didn't make a good job of it because of poor
sterility in their labs.The UK kept the system two years longer than the US.Even the low fade prints have started
to show signs of less density.So far IBs are the best for retaining colour, but the stock is letting them down.Funnily enough
Kodak had the Technology to stop Eastman film fading,but Hollywood didn't want to pay for it,and are paying for it now
because they can't make new prints from a lot of their negs as
the colours have gone.

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on April 11, 2012, 08:28 PM:

Winbert and all-This explains the Technicolor process in detail. This is page 6 and you can jump to previous pages for early color processes:

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/oldcolor/technicolor6.htm

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on April 12, 2012, 12:25 PM:

Thanks Larry,

So since I found in many film posters says "TECHNICOLOR" does it mean those films were shot with this expensive method or was printed on IB Tech method (but can be shot in non-technicolor?

I am still confused....

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on April 12, 2012, 12:52 PM:

Winbert,
A film may have been shot in Technicolor (which is what would be implied on the posters) - this has no bearing on whether or not a particular print of this title is printed on IB Technicolor.
This is something which many ebay sellers appear not to realise.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 12, 2012, 01:03 PM:

I could be wrong, but wasn't "The Godfather" the last actual film to be shot with Technicolor Cameras, as well as Technicolor processing? (instead of being shot on Eastman, for instance, but being processed by Technicolor).

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on April 12, 2012, 01:20 PM:

As far as I know, Godfather, Part II was the last AMERICAN film released before they shut their plant in '75. Other countries continued a bit longer.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on April 12, 2012, 01:46 PM:

Like I said Winbert,the last big feature in the UK using the IB
process was the first "STAR WARS The old IB process was
resurrected for three later films "BULWORTH","TITUS" and
"GODZILLA",of the 6,200 release prints of "GODZILLA",1000 were in IB TECH
because the makers wanted to have deeper more saturated
blacks.Special release prints have also been done with "GIANT",
"VERTIGO","WIZARD OF OZ" and"GONE WITH THE WIND"using
the dye transfer process.These prints were done on polyester based film stock,so theres no fear of vinegar syndrome there.
As Osi and Michael said,a lot of films
display the technicolor logo,but a lot of the time it's not.which
don't get me wrong, as the early Hammer Films used Eastman
colour and they were beautiful.

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on April 12, 2012, 05:40 PM:

As stated before, Color by Technicolor, doesn't necessarily mean it was shot with a Technicolor camera. GODFATHER was shot on Eastman negative with a normal camera, I believe a Mithchell. But was printed dye-transfer. I know PEARL HARBOR also had a limited dye-transfer run. Also, APOCALYPSE NOW REDUX was printed dye-transfer and a print would up on Ebay.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on April 12, 2012, 06:28 PM:

Well done on that link Larry,they say a pictures worth a thousand
words,and this ones in Technicolor! It explains the process very
well indeed.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2