Have any of you ever thought of leaving the hobby?

[Graham Ritchie]

Talking about buying expensive films these days, somehow this one still from a 1940s movie I watched a while back, that might happen to me if I bought any more "films" sending "me" of to La La land health wise its best to play safe for me to stick to buying blu-ray

[Douglas Meltzer]

I left the hobby when I first went to college, right at the time the Universal 2x400' releases were coming out. I didn't return for a decade. Ironically, I was shooting film but not collecting it. Discovering this Forum, Derann & CHC rekindled my love for film collecting. I occasionally do get frustrated when the equipment acts up, however I have no intention of leaving the hobby. Hi-res projection can look great, but for me there is no comparison to using a film projector.

Once again, let's clear up the misinformation on the costs of producing releases. As far as I can tell, there are only a few people here who have actually been involved in this process, and they've talked about the expenses involved. Adam Deierling wrote, "To be clear, digital source or not, Andec still has to strike a negative in order to create prints. They don't make prints directly from a digital file... So yes, the expense is legitimate."

Returning to the topic, as long as I can lift that projector I'll still plan on watching films.

[Osi Osgood]

Alan, you had stated, probably in jest, that a 600ft would be 600.00. actually, it's about 350.00 or so, so about half of what you stated. Still high, yeah, but when I went about buying the 600ft JAWS, I sold my Universal 8 unfaded digest of the same title, and made 425.00, with 75.00 dollars extra in the bank and what did I get? Not only a print was was most definitely sharper, more colorful, but also the extra care that a fellow fan took to put together scene by scene, the film to make a great digest!

[Alan Myers]

Osi, you are correct, but I,m going by Lee"s 200ft releases at 130 to 150 which is what the latest one is being priced at,. Three of these will set you back 450 (equivilant to 600ft). Lee said he is losing 40 on each sale,therefore it suggests a 200 reel should be 190, agree? I make that a tad under 600, 570 to be exact. The sums dont add up, where does 350 come from for a 600 reel?
To buy home alone in the UK will set us back well over 400 with postage. Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Trevor Adams]

Little known fact....I still carry my MICRO-CINE 9.5mm machine around in my pocket. In a trice I can have MM in Lilliput lighting up a diminutive screen.Always have 'the hobby' at hand...I reckon,anyhow. Trev

[Brian Fretwell]

I believe Lee said the name Dorunn is just a tribute to Derann, no other connection.

[Alan Myers]

Thats a nice gesture,
Douglas, like you, I wont ever leave the hobby but many people I am in touch with no longer add to their collections because they have also become disillusioned with the hobby and the way prices have gone. It's great as a collector knowing that there is value in our collections should we choose to sell some or leave the hobby but it doesn't help the cause of retaining newer collectors.

Lee, I think you should really be careful losing so much on a print, I've worked out as Phil said earlier, you've done three xmas trailer reels, and several others, if your selling around 30, lets say 20, of each title you release, thats a loss of well over 500 quid, possibly a thousand or more with the other films you have released, why would anyone do that? Doing it for the love of collectors and films is not realistic my friend, indeed, some collectors sell them on a few years later and actually make a profit themselves, we've seen this with Jurassic park and True lies, I know those wernt your releases but no one can go on losing money, why would anyone do that? I only come back to this because I just find it hard to believe that you (or anyone else), would be prepared to keep making new releases KNOWING your going to lose money.
The free labour you mentioned is I assume something you fill a normal day with or an evening if your at work all day, to me that would fun. So while you lose money, Andec is making money so that makes it even worse knowing your putting it all together but only Andec are quid's in.

Doug, thanks for clearing up the cost thing, all said, there's still no original 35 or 16mm prints involved to have to buy or hire to edit so thats a major cost gone, but if a negative has to be produced then yes I get that.
On that point, (to clear this one up as well), These prints are all limited in numbers, so if a negative has to be produced, is there a reason they cant continue to be ordered on demand after the initial release? I understand new films released across the pond are actually ordered and printed on demand. To produce a negative and only run off the initial first run or two seems a waste.

[Osi Osgood]

I would assume that new prints could be struck from existing negatives, Alan, but there are only so many that want to buy new prints ... Period. Lee Well,Ifi that,e and,h after a negative had been used for about 30 or so prints, the negative starts to show some wear, so you'd have to strike a new negative. If he's got the cash to blow on these releases, why try to dissuade him? I really don't understand that. I'm sure that he knows the costs ahead of time. That's the love of the hobby, not just Lee, but the handful of others as well and myself, in the distant past. Part of the fun is just adding to the legacy of super 8, irregardless of the cost. It's no more Looney in my opinion, than people buying a new car every few years, knowing full well, that it drops in value a few thousand dollars alone, just putting the key in the ignition. More Looney's? Doctors and nurses, dealing with lung cancer patients, due to smoking ... They get a break? They go outside to have a smoke! Now, that's the epitome of Looney!

[Alan Myers]

errr, I dont see the comparison, but I hear what you are saying.

No matter how much I loved any hobby, I would NOT make new releases knowing from day one that I would lose money unless I was extremely well off, or here in the UK, on the benefits system as they seem to have money to burn, and all day to burn it. In a way, if it were paid by benefits, I could say, all of the working collectors had a hand in the release hey hey. (only joking)

[Brian Fretwell]

If he wants a copy on film himself, one off, that might cost more than he loses in making 30.

[Lee Mannering]

I believe Lee said the name Dorunn is just a tribute to Derann, no other connection.

This is true xx


Making new prints happen post brexit is very hard work
Give it a go yourself.

[Mike Newell]

Surely if a 16mm negative is created from a digital source it still exists somewhere in the world presumably Germany and it means further prints can be generated at a later date with reduced costs. Negatives are not destroyed by running just 30 prints. I can understand damage to full features but not small 200’ releases on their 1st run unless the lab is just plain incompetent.

[Lee Mannering]

Some of you are missing the point. We do it for the love of S8. It's been.our lives and I think.i can speak for the famous 4.
30 prints sold? Amazing I wish as your sums do not match reality.

[Joe Caruso]

What disillusionment? .Always understand that times have slightly changed. The cost of new prints (Super/Std 8) and 16 was commensurate with lab and tech support. When someone creates a new neg for a new print-run, it will be costly...a devotion to the cause of course, but quality has no substitute. We pay a premium and be thankful that most of us can still do what we did back in the 60s and 70s, buying new prints, attending shows and conferring with our fellow collectors. Personally, I got hooked about 1961and despite my theatre work, school and other livelihoods, have never left. Sold, traded and bartered prints here and again, but remained steadfastly loyal to 16 and the narrow gauges...Cheers, Shorty

[Osi Osgood]

Exactly Lee, to the point. Alan, there are those that get into the collecting bit, and surely enjoy they're films, but it is another whole level of commitment to the hobby to release brand new material. It's love, pure and simple. Anybody can just Shell out money and buy a film and project it, what Lee and others do is flat out devotion, and it's not insanity in any way shape or form. Not everything in life has to be about making money. Mike, from my own personal experience, I can tell you that a negative does in fact degrade after a certain point, not necessarily at 30 prints Everytime, but I did notice a difference between my first test prints of my release years ago, and the later prints. It's just normal wear and tear. It's reminds me of a number of older super 8 releases, where low budget companies would acquire a negative of some public domain title, and the resulting prints from that negative makes the first run prints from said negative look terribly tired.