8mm Forum: Secondhand / used print quality.

This is topic Secondhand / used print quality. in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004056

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on August 11, 2016, 04:56 AM:

I have been catching up looking at some screenshots.
I see a lot of them have faded or have bad green or black tramline scratches on them.
Therefore they are worn and actually damaged prints.

I am asking the reason why anyone would want to collect such prints considering there are cheaper and better quality alternatives on DVD/BLU-RAYs to be had for very cheap ?

Please don't reply with " because its on film " I have heard that
one many times before.
[Wink]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 11, 2016, 06:32 AM:

Because many we have David, do not suffer fade nor have green emulsion scratches on them.
For the ones with hairline black base side scratches, there is filmguard to make these invisible.

If there were only faded, heavy frequent emulsion scratched films available out there, I wouldn't be still interested in this hobby either David.

As DVD projection and even Blu Ray projection has now been possible for many many years, I am a little baffled as to why you stuck with film up until now David, given your revelations? [Confused]

One of my main reasons for giving up on this hobby many years ago now, first time around, was because I couldn't afford both the expensive LCD projectors at the time plus continue to collect film,.. but also because I got sick and tired of my main machine back then, randomly scratching my films despite my utmost efforts to stop this from happening.

Again, if they were the only projectors left to buy now, that would have been another reason why I would never had come back to this hobby of collecting film.
In fact I was almost at that very stage when I first returned but before discovering the machines I now use and rely upon wholeheartedly.

But for them also, I'd be out now David.

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on August 11, 2016, 06:43 AM:

Andrew I was being specific about the damaged prints and as to why anyone would want to buy a faded scratched print.

As to my reason sticking with film with so long that's easy to
answer.

A "habit" just like smoking and boozing and I have given those up.
[Wink]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 11, 2016, 06:51 AM:

If these type of prints do sell David, they only sell quite cheap.
I bought one as you describe recently,with some fade and hairline scratches throughout (no green thankfully), but only because it was a title I really wanted on Super 8mm.

It didn't cost a lot, so I am satisfied. [Smile]

My old habits die hard David. [Big Grin]

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on August 11, 2016, 09:27 AM:

So there you go. It all gets very subjective to a degree.
I would never buy a print I really wanted with these defects on it just because it is going cheap.
I would always feel it was not good enough condition.
For example I remember buying a cheap print of the feature "CARRY ON SCREAMING" from CHC but I could not tolerate the green tramline
scratches so I returned it and got a refund.
Now that's a print I really did want but had to let it go. I could not compromise on price vs print quality .
[Big Grin]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 11, 2016, 10:37 AM:

I think with film or vinyl David, we have to remain somewhat realistic.
These items are actual real tactile items.Things you can actually touch, hold up to the light to see, or examine for flaws to a groove let's say, not some invisible encrypted data embedded in a disc.

There is a certain charm with analogue items that simply isn't there with it's digital counterparts for many older members of society and quite a few young ones nowadays!

If it comes with one or two small flaws, most collectors can live with that.
Let's face it, even brand spanking new cinema prints, like you used and fell in love with in the early days, all had inherent flaws that are simply the dna of film, sparkle, specks etc.

Digital imagery of today, to the human eye, can indeed appear flawless and perfect. But still to many, it has a somewhat sterile nature to it by being this perfect.

I enjoy both mediums just as in the same way I enjoy the different merits of analogue vs digital music, but I won't be calling a record that has some introduction surface noise any more than I would begin to call a DVD that won't play or begins skipping. It's just what you come to know and expect from the medium and as such is all part of the challenge of owning these items, to my way of thinking.

To conclude, generally, I now only buy good condition low fade prints, but occasionally, if a title comes along I fancy outside of these expensive parameters, then I will take a chance on it if I feel I will still gain enjoyment from it using my prefered method of projection, and of course, the price is right. [Smile]

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on August 11, 2016, 11:33 AM:

Sometimes, David, there will be a film that was only released on super 8 or other film guages and never released on any other format.

For instance, I had a super 8 optical sound feature print of "Ruckus" a Dirk Benedict ("Starbuck" of the original Battlestar Galactica), which had Kodak SP brownish fade. Until just recently, it had not been released on any other format, so the only way to actually see the film was by owning a print yourself.

in other cases, there is just something about having an actual print of a film, no matter what shape it is in.

Some film-makers, I have noticed, will purposefully use scratched and damaged prints in thier own film work, as a loving "homage' to film, using, for instance, old "coming attractions' or "Our Feature Presentation" bits O 35MM in thier films, just for the love if it!

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on August 11, 2016, 12:03 PM:

Andrew accept the valid point you make about good old analogue
items being of a tactile nature and hence its attraction to
collectors. However that point for me is getting a bit long in the tooth now and somewhat old hat.
Its an argument I myself would use for remaining with film and vinyl lps in the early days of VHS tapes and CDs.

The question I asked was why would anyone want to collect worn and faded films ?
I would never by a worn microgroove lp record or film.

Osi ... I suppose you are right its back to the old answer of
just because its on film.
Makes no sense to me if its a junk print.
Never mind I guess one mans junk is another's prized antique.

[Smile]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on August 11, 2016, 12:08 PM:

I'd say your last line there David sums it all up really.

Collecting Antiques is a very good analogy to use when comparing the motives of people who collect things like film and vinyl.

Many I see on TV and in and around the shops at places such as Harrogate recently, I wouldn't give you tuppence for!
However the prices asked and got in many many cases are staggering!

[ August 11, 2016, 04:53 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on August 12, 2016, 11:58 AM:

It really does come alive for me, when I see Casablanca on film, over digital any day of the week.

I once kept a print of Warlords of Atlantis, 4X400ft (Doug McClure 1978) that was in deplorable shape, complete with green scratches, some color fade, and splices here and there ...

... and yet, I'd still pull it out and watch it, over and over again. It is/was my most repeated title in my collection. I saw it as a child in the theater, (well 12 years old), and I still felt the same seeing that terribly worn but most beloeved print!

It's kind of hard to explain, but i just LOVE IT!!

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on August 12, 2016, 12:47 PM:

Not to forget that when one buys the film it is 'top notch, nice condition' but when it arrives it is scratched and faded. This is certainly how most of my damaged films are purchased.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2