This is topic Destruction of faded and pinky/red prints. 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=004355
Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on April 14, 2017, 03:38 PM:
I have been in touch with some "old timer" film collector
friends of mine here in the U.K. the past couple of days.
It turns out we have all been binning our old and faded red pinky/red prints on all gauges.
We all felt it was time to start taking some action to get these
things out of circulation for good.
I know this news may shock some collectors but we have now all
taken an oath to continue to do so well into the future.
The cull will go on.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 14, 2017, 04:04 PM:
Its a shame that David. Many titles i can think of on eight are unique to the fading Eastman stock. Most of the opticals for example.
While i feel it is morally correct not to sell these prints to unaware potential customers, people like Vidar here for example, regulary provide a new home for such prints to be enjoyed for far more years yet.
Also many ive seen him show, look perfectly acceptable still, once they have decent colour correction filters placed in front of the primary lens.
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on April 14, 2017, 04:04 PM:
You know what David, i am pleased you are doing this, i myself have discarded one or two 8mm that were red, i really cant see why anyone would want to sit through an all red film, especially given how many excellent colour films are out there and not to mention the very reliable b/w films.
A few years ago i did a thread asking if we should start destroying these worn red and pink films now and just stop them going around. we already started selling some off that are on the turn.
Lets be honest, like dvd/blu ray or not they are a dam good tool for showing side by side our cine films. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Andy, i do take your point on films that do still have plenty of colours left though, but as far as a red or pink film image is concerned i think they need to be taken out of our hobby now.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 14, 2017, 04:06 PM:
Two very opposite views there then, right from the outset!
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on April 14, 2017, 04:08 PM:
Andy, i did add a bit in there as your reply was added while i was typing
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 14, 2017, 04:10 PM:
Just lets all remember here, once something is destroyed, a piece of history is gone forever.
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on April 14, 2017, 04:21 PM:
i see what you are saying there Andy but i think to carry on passing these prints around just makes our hobby a bit redundant.
iF I had an audience in and put on a red or pink film they would laugh at me. There are plenty of good films out there to be had still and the way to show off our hobby is to get rid of the trash to ensure cine film is still great.
i fully understand people are happy to sit through a red film, (im not talking about films just turning i mean red or pink),but for me its a waste of time and i cant see any enjoyment in it, on this alone i would prefer to project a disc.
I am not putting anyone down who is happy to watch red,merely agreeing to get shot of them and to add it isn't for me.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 14, 2017, 04:43 PM:
Nor me Tom, but this is a very subjective topic and there are just so so many different degrees and types of fade.
I would simply offer all but beetroot films out to anyone who wants them along with an accompanying screenshot or two.
That way the deadwood sorts itself out.
I'd look upon it in a similar manner to how our rescue centres deal with say a 13 yr old rescue dog who had sadly become recently detached from its loyal and loving owner due to bereavement.
The dog also has many complications involving quite steep regular vet bills for medication needed.
Thankfully our rescue centre does not choose to put this animal to sleep unless no owner can first be found to continue to show the dog the love and affection it deserves in its later life.
Only as a very last resort, would a lethal injection be administered here, despite the majority of potential dog owners looking for a much younger and vibrant, healthier pet all around.
I salute all of those people who do give a home to an animal in such circumstances.
[ April 15, 2017, 01:59 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]
Posted by Clinton Hunt (Member # 2072) on April 14, 2017, 05:51 PM:
Given the number of prints that have turned or are turning red then this might destroy a hell of a lot!
For beginners they can provide a cheap start to a collection and then the individual can decide to keep or on sell.
I have a few red prints that are only available in that condition.
Now if the dreaded VS starts then it's time to throw.
But this opinion is just mine and for now that's what I do ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on April 15, 2017, 12:51 AM:
I am certainly binning some of the worst prints. Especially if they are both fully gone in colour and have other problems like scratches or perf damage. But only the worst condition stuff.
Posted by Burton Sundquist (Member # 5813) on April 15, 2017, 01:05 AM:
...Alert...Don't destroy your movies..
This is not F451...there are possibilities. A member of this forum offers gells to help making the viewing of films going through this aging process much more retro and allows the audience a cinema experience... There are options to those who cherish film...
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 15, 2017, 01:25 AM:
For the items like Steven speaks of above, best thing is to scrap them, for anything else, follow Burton's advice.
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on April 15, 2017, 02:07 AM:
Im tredding carefully here as,like i said,i am and have sold on films which are turning or are more or less red, however, a good example of one i think is for the bin is curruntly on fleabay. Its a copy of towering inferno. The images show a red film and the description is perfectly honest. It states red and scratched. But starts at over 100. It shud be £1.
Sitting through three hours of a red film would bring no enjoyment at all and if you enjoy movies as we all do i cant see how it could.
A few being kept as mentioned for education purposes is ine thing but keeping 100% RED/PINK films just doesnt cut it for me.
I,ll repeat, i have no problems with films on the turn,(a high percentage of films sold these days)
Posted by David Roberts (Member # 197) on April 15, 2017, 03:10 AM:
ive binned films,some recently.
this includes B/W films that are such poor quality,not just scratches but the film base breaking down,or the picture bleached out in places.
This stuff is just best taken out of circulation for ever.
Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on April 15, 2017, 03:35 AM:
Tom nice to read you are adhering to the same principles and
reasons as other die hard old timer collectors here in the UK.
Andrew while we may be destroying a piece of history as you state
the titles that are being disposed of are easily available on other mediums. So no loss for posterity at all.
Also even using filters will never restore a print to its former
colour ever.
Yes badly worn and scratched and damaged prints need to be taken out of circulation too.
Unless of course they are extremely rare . That includes B/W stock.
Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on April 15, 2017, 05:50 AM:
In all the 14 months or so that I have been on this forum, this topic has left me the most confused as far as which side of the fence I should be standing on.
Up until reading this.... complete with its very creditable "Yes" and "No" arguments,there have always been TWO items that I have regarded as sacrilege to destroy. The first.... vinyl records.No matter what condition, I just cannot bring myself to stick them in the bin. I just CAN'T and that's that.
The second..... is film.It is just completely against my principle. I am here to watch, collect, preserve, enjoy and, I suppose, promote this wonderful medium, not to cull it.
But,wait a minute, a lot of reels are so far gone that, realistically, they are beyond viewing.Are they r e a l l y worth keeping in circulation? How many times has one bought a film on Ebay and in your heart of hearts have been disappointed in the colour? Your instinct is telling you this seller was just offloading a pile of sh**e..... or are you guilty of selling one,knowing it has almost come to the end of its useful life? It would give greater piece of mind knowing the chances of a print you are buying from wherever will be pretty good, quality-wise! So,do I re-think my principle?
There again,most people in our fraternity are damn decent people who are quite happy to be up front about descriptions of their films.... almost to the point of shooting themselves in the foot sometimes. So,is there any need to cull? By doing so,these titles become scarcer and what follows scarcity? Value.Which means increased prices. We are regularly passing comment about the stupid prices on Ebay some people (hopefully not from the regular fraternity)are charging already. Do we want to add more fuel to this fire? We want more people to join us,not leave. Surely,the answer to this must be to either give the films away to a friend who may show the remotest interest in the hobby.... or sell them on Ebay for a stupid price in the right direction (very very low),with an honest description so that maybe... just maybe... it would encourage casual browsers to finally take the plunge.
So,whereabouts am I going to make my stand? Well, there is something that one has the right to and cannot be controlled by another person.That is..... action and opinion. Nothing I could do,or would want to do,would stop David and his friends doing what they are doing because, just like you and me, they have a right to do exactly what they like with their own possessions. If that is their choice, then so be it. One may understand the reasons behind their actions without necessarily agreeing with them.
Personally, I won't be binning anything.. be it vinyl or celluloid...After all this debate,it still remains against my principle.
The argument for and against a cull really boils down to the old saying "Everyone to Everyones Own."
.
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on April 15, 2017, 07:40 AM:
I have no interest at all in watching a faded print while there are usually other ways of viewing the film.
However, there are many collectors who, for whatever reason, are happy with faded prints
So, why destroy them? Sell them on honestly, or give them for free, to those who want them.
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on April 15, 2017, 07:59 AM:
Good answer there Melvin, & i do hear what you are saying on this subject. I think for me red is simply no good, the film cannot be repaired or colours retrieved so like everything else its use is no longer.I guess if anyone is happy to sit through a red or pink movie thats fine, if this was the only way to see a movie i would say save it but it isn't and unlike Video tapes in the early to mid 80s, today's digital mediums are quite stunning, they are not reel film nor would i compare them, but they are certainly very good so i can see no reason to prolong cine film if it is beyond reasonable viewing ability.
Mike, also a fair point as long as, as well as being faded its full of scratches and repairs all the way through.
Posted by David Roberts (Member # 197) on April 15, 2017, 08:04 AM:
The stuff ive binned has been of very poor quality,not just lines,but unsteady both verticaly and horizontaly"ie its shrunk" very unsharp and the film base showing signs of breaking down.
it does the hobby no favours keeping this sort of print in circulation.
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on April 15, 2017, 08:17 AM:
& this David is exactly what i mean, its no use to anyone.No point in getting sentimental about "stuff".
Posted by Melvin England (Member # 5270) on April 15, 2017, 09:16 AM:
Such an interesting topic receiving healthy debate from both sides of the discussion.
I feel that after re-reading the posts on this subject, plus the new ones since my last post, particularly David Roberts recent comments, I feel I must indicate where the boundary of my "principle" extends to with regards to throwing away film.
If there was firm evidence of the film base breaking down, severe sprocket damage on most of it, mould all over it, vinegar syndrome or severe shrinkage, then, yes,let us be reasonable, it is beyond recovery and justifiably discarded (particularly with vinegar syndrome as it is so contagious). I once was given a 200' film by someone who thought they were doing me a favour. It had..... wait for it..... 150 splices in it! On that occasion I made an exception to my "principle" which I think was justified.
However, a perfectly watchable pink/red film with at least acceptable sound and low evidence of scratching, in my mind, would not warrant the bin.
.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 15, 2017, 10:36 AM:
I was just having recollections of the Elvis features I have and treasure.
Most of these are fading now as everyone is aware of the Viacom prints. They are not red ( with the exception of one second print that was mis sold to me), but they are fading nevertheless.
They all have some varying degrees of each of the primary colours left in them and they each have all been recorded subsequently by myself into booming stereo. They each sound superb.
It would take me a very very long time yet to deem these prints completely undesirable to view imo and I'd hope, many other people's opinions.
Therefore it's films like these and many of the better airline prints, that I'd be reluctant to call time on even if I one day had to use compensation filters to still be able to enjoy them.
Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on April 15, 2017, 11:00 AM:
Many years back I knowingly bought a 16mm red print of the Roger Corman classic, "Tales of Terror".
It was only £20.00 from a dealer and honestly described as red, so I took a chance and really enjoyed screening it many times to family and friends.
The image was sharp and steady, despite being beetroot and everyone enjoyed it. However, that was the late 90's when DVD was just getting started.
Many years later, I had the scope DVD with lovely image and colour, so I binned the red pan & scan 16mm print.
Harsh, but I really couldn't see the point of it any more...
I don't honestly believe that the film makers would want their work to be viewed like that.
Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on April 15, 2017, 11:00 AM:
I wouldn't accept or sell on red /pink prints. The dealers I dealt with on a regular basis knew that so in the good old days I was insulated against receipt of them. There are also pink laurel and hardy black and white prints. They have been printed incorrectly imported by a certain dealer and were touted around as brand new polyester prints. I bought 8 titles on promises and they were chronic. I know there are at least 10-20 prints of each title and that other collectors were stung at same time (1993). If we are disposing of dodgy prints can I recommend all those soft focus and scratchy prints that also do the rounds plus the diy splice jobs with sellotape that destroy projectors.
I think the comparison to vinyl is like washing your records in the sink using a scrubbing brush like the wee lad from spec savers ad.
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 15, 2017, 12:07 PM:
I've been fairly lucky on my super 8 optical sound collection. Those that are not low fade, still have pretty good color and are in cold storage, and the low fade ones are just fine.
It does sadden me that so many great super 8 color features were saved on terrible quick fade eastman. i once had a feature film "Emperor of the North" (Le marvin excellent film!), that I've only run across just once, but it was already sadly faded to red. I so loved that film and so wished it would have been saved on low fade of some form, but alas ... no dice!
Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on April 15, 2017, 12:20 PM:
Quote;
"It is possible that we...have grown so old and inflexible that we have outlived our usefulness".
Spock talking to his faded film collection...(although could have been Kirk...)
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on April 15, 2017, 12:20 PM:
I do agree with Rob regarding the intentions of the creators of the work.
I just don't see how it's helping the hobby in any particular way to destroy faded prints as long as there are some collectors who enjoy them. They are usually very affordable.
I don't feel the prints themselves are of any particular historical value though, unless we're talking about the last surviving print of a particular title.
Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on April 15, 2017, 12:23 PM:
It is a difficult one, I agree, Michael, because I certainly enjoyed that print back in the day and learned a lot from it, but I couldn't really see the DP watching it with me without tearing his hair out!
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 15, 2017, 02:28 PM:
I watched A Fish Called Wanda and Lethal Weapon again on first receipt of finally obtaining a SH 30 not long back.
Judging from what I saw, both of these fine films have at least 20 years left in them if kept in even reasonable conditions as I like to.
We ain't talking refrigeration here!
There are still quite a few that look absolutely fine still.
Even ones on the slight turn I see, I will conservatively give a decade to without major issues concerning fade.
Just keep em below 10 degrees Celsius. 😊
Norway's good for such prints I hear, at this time of the year!😂😂
Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on April 15, 2017, 03:32 PM:
It is a pity that the crappy fast fade stock was ever even bought into use. Home movies made by us using Standard 8 and super 8 kodak when i was just 10, (45 years ago), is as good now as it was then. Why the hell did anything else get used? I know it was probably cheap and all about profit etc but Eastman should be sued when you consider how much home movies cost to buy. Its not like they were 9.99.
No one gives a dam about Videos or DVDs, if they go wrong buy another one for a couple of quid but home movies were always expensive so those sold for home viewing as opposed to hire should have always been put out on decent stocks.
Only in my opinion ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posted by David Roberts (Member # 197) on April 15, 2017, 03:45 PM:
my earlier comments were with regard to some b/w prints not worth keeping,
I have also junked badly faded and scratched colour items.
if its turned red/brown,has bad tramlines and loads of splices,put it out of its misery!
I also commend super 8 warehouse,because he describes his films very carefully,and will say if a film has lost some of its colour,and any other faults, eg lines etc. so you know what you are getting.
Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on April 15, 2017, 03:52 PM:
you know instinctively , what to expect if you regularly collect film David.
I got "bit" on my viacom Elvis print only because I had a reasonable print to begin with. The seller described his as much better, it wasn't it was knackered totally!
It was utter lies.
Stick with instinct, learn by my mistakes and question EVERYONE except dealers such as Ian, or private collectors such as Kevin or Stuart or Tom etc!
Top Tips there if you care to follow any of them!
Posted by David Roberts (Member # 197) on April 15, 2017, 05:08 PM:
ive been collecting off and on 40 years Andrew.
I use the few dealers we have left in the uk,and just recently,have had to return a lot of films . Thankfuly these dealers are decent and will always refund. I have wondered though if they should check all films thoroughly,and not just the first few feet. perhaps this is unrealistic,but it would save a lot of trips to the post office.
Posted by Tom Spielman (Member # 5352) on April 16, 2017, 12:04 AM:
I don't collect film so I won't offer an opinion. I will say that this is a very interesting discussion and I've enjoyed the points you all have made:
- Does the continued existence of these prints harm the hobby?
- Would the removal of these prints from circulation just drive up prices?
- Would the creators of these films want them viewed in this condition?
- Do things have a lifetime? When they've faded past a certain point, is the soul gone? Are they just ghosts?
- Should something be discarded when someone, somewhere might appreciate it?
[ April 16, 2017, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: Tom Spielman ]
Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on April 16, 2017, 02:55 AM:
I only junked my red 16mm because I honestly didn't think I could even give it away and to answer one of Tom's questions, I really don't think the film makers would appreciate faded prints.
I once watched something I'd shot on a mate's TV which was calibrated all wrong and it drove me nuts!!
On the other hand, someone like Lucas would probably burn all of our full length slightly grainy prints of "Star Wars" given half the chance.
I once took a slightly faded print of "All the Presidents Men" to the bring & buy at Blackpool and despite asking only about £20.00 there was no interest...still have it if anyone wants it!
But then again, I do have some pink super 400 footers that hold such happy memories of being a kid that I could never part with them.
Just slightly off topic, but I had my mate over the other day for one of our regular movie watching days and one of the choices was the Blu-ray of "Where Eagles Dare".
As we were both marvelling at the quality, I was telling him how much I used to pay for film prints of big titles, many of which would now be faded.
I do love film, but we live in very fortunate times for movie lovers.
I remember reading about film fade on 16mm prints back in the 90's and people contemplating the prospect of fade on 8mm, which hadn't really started at that point.
It is kinda sad watching my now pink 400ft "Star Wars", but then again, I wish I had aged as well as it has!!
Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on April 16, 2017, 02:03 PM:
I was gutted when I had to destroy my faded to red 16mm print of
Tales Of Terror along with others.
However I felt it was the right thing to do and still do.
I don't think taking red faded prints out of circulation is going to have a significant increase on prices of good prints in
the long term.
I think my 16mm print of Hammer Films 'Plague Of The Zombies "
is on its way out colour wise.
Oh well that's another one for the wheelie bin I suppose.
Never mind I will gain a couple more empty spools.
Good quality prints are in a different section of the market.
Anyone who wants to buy good quality prints would not touch poor
prints with a 10 foot barge pole anyway.
The same applies to my other interests of vinyl records and comic books.
Some people are already exploiting these markets buy asking high prices for poor quality vinyl pressings and comic books.
However the arse will fall out of these markets as less people buy into them when common sense overrides mere nostalgia and collectors finally realise they have bought worthless junk.
Its only as Tom states ... stuff after all.
Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on April 16, 2017, 04:58 PM:
Where there's life there's hope. What 'if' someone finds a solution for bringing back color to faded prints?
Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on April 17, 2017, 03:50 AM:
Okay, here's an example:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/401308414860
This is quite pink. But if it were an interesting subject, like this would be to me, the space program, then I'd find it hard to bin just for being red. If that was all and it was otherwise good condition. But if it was littered with splices or had tramlines then it would go in the bin. It would be a judgement though, overall how I felt about it...
[ April 17, 2017, 05:15 AM: Message edited by: Steven J Kirk ]
Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on April 17, 2017, 06:00 AM:
Yes Steve that's a fine example of a pink print on 16mm.
Just the kind I would not consider keeping or buying even
at £19.99.
Why would i when its available on a region free DVD for around
£12 - £ 13 with no fade problems. Just as the makers intended them to be seen.
Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on April 17, 2017, 08:35 AM:
Just seen the red print for sale of The Pink Panther I started laughing. I have a couple of really red ones The 200ft Walton It's All Over Town, still can watch it though. My Kelly's Heroes 16mm scope feature is not faded, but khaki it is a war film.
Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on April 17, 2017, 08:38 AM:
David, you know, you mentioning "Plague of Zombies" is quite interesting in that I love those Hammer films and really admire the cinematography. I would have dearly loved the Derann 4 x 400ft back when I was a kid.
I have the Blu-ray of it and it is beautiful, but a lot of the re-mastered Hammer films for Blu-ray were very heavily criticised from all and sundry about colour balance / correction, etc.
Larry's post about being able to bring back the colour to faded film prints actually brought shivers to my spine for a moment. OMG! I may have thrown out retrievable prints.
But then given the criticism regarding carefully restored and re-colour calibrated HD releases, I think we're pretty safe in our actions to bin certain prints????
Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on April 17, 2017, 10:12 AM:
Rob I still have the 1x 400 foot version of Plague Of The Zombies.
I have not checked the colour lately on that one though.
I too am a big Hammer Film and have seen the Blu - Ray version
on my son's video projection system.
I thought it looked brilliant despite the colour criticisms from
these so called experts.
I suspect most of them only saw the Hammer Films on a tube colour television anyway.
I showed the 35mm prints a few times at the cinemas I worked in
and don't know what the hell these experts are talking about.
I think the Blu-Ray looked every bit as good as the 35mm prints.
Those experts must have very photographic memories indeed.
Posted by Chris Bird (Member # 3839) on April 17, 2017, 10:29 AM:
This has been a most fascinating thread, and really interesting to see the differing opinions from so many advanced collectors.
My own opinion is that it's risky trying to police the hobby by destroying prints we regard as inferior. One man's rubbish is another man's treasure and all that.
Many more pre-LPP prints will fade over the years, and one thing's certain, there will be no more prints struck of the vast majority of titles.
I concentrate mainly on silent era titles, and have kept various prints in poor condition but of very rare titles that would be hard to replace. And I am alarmed by how much rarer some titles seem to have become than they were when I began collecting in the 90s.
Filmmakers might not wish to see their films shown faded to pink, but it's probably safe to say they also wouldn't like their work cut down to 18 minute digests and reduced from widescreen to 4:3! So I don't think the 'filmmaker wouldn't like it' argument is a good enough case for destroying films that some of us might treasure.
Just a suggestion - if people have prints they regard as not worth keeping, why not offer them on the forum free to anyone who wants them, provided postage is paid for? At least that way these prints can be given a last chance at finding a new home before being destroyed. I put unwanted prints on the free table at the Rickmansworth fair, and they get snapped up.
Posted by Tom Spielman (Member # 5352) on April 17, 2017, 10:52 AM:
Larry: I guess anything is possible. However I know that what can be done today is exceptionally expensive to do photochemically and what most film archives opt to do instead is attempt to do it digitally.
Doing it digitally doesn't restore the original film of course but allows better prints to be made.
Who knows, perhaps someday some smart nano-technology could compare a faded print to a digital or unfaded print and restore the dyes to a like new state. My guess is that it would be an extremely expensive process and from a practical standpoint, to what end?
It would be far easier I would think just to make a new print. Apparently there are places that will still stripe film. And Kodak says they will be reproducing ektachrome reversal. What would a reverse telecine film look like that was made from a blu-ray? I'm sure you couldn't legally sell such a thing and you'd probably have to process it yourself because I doubt any lab would. However, I think legally one is still entitled to make a backup copy of the movies they purchase.
None of that is easy or inexpensive, but probably cheaper than restoring a faded super 8 copy.
It seems that there are at least a few of you that restore or improve the original audio tracks by re-recording from a digital source. What if you could do the same on a new film with the images?
Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on April 19, 2017, 01:45 PM:
David, since such film will never, ever be manufactured again, why don't you sell it as home theater decor? Everyone should have a reel mounted on their wall, don't you think? Well, I do.
EDIT:
You could be losing out on some serious money!!!
Posted by Mike Newell (Member # 23) on April 19, 2017, 04:24 PM:
I sold a lot of John Wayne shorts to a fellow collector for his man cave and that is actual what he did mount them on a wall plus a fully functioning Elmo projector. Did look surreal as if he had been out big game cine hunting👹👹👹
Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2