Digital VS Celluloid source ....

[Douglas Meltzer]

Since Dave brought it up, when we ask for submissions for CineSea's Friday Night Feature voting, the wording is "If you're coming to CineSea and have a print you'd like to show, please email me with the title and format (Standard 8mm/Super 8mm/9.5mm/16mm/35mm/B&W/Color/Scope/Flat)." I never thought of asking collectors to state if their print is from a digital source. While I think people are more interested in what the movie is as opposed to how the print was produced, perhaps we'll add that information next time.

[Phil Moors]

Some interesting points have been raised on the subject. Looking at it another way, if you were to digitally source and produce a print of Gone with the Wind, this would equate to 8 x 600’ reels. Looking at the cost of Jurassic Park, £300 for 600’ this would come out at a staggering £2400. The digital blu ray is £ 7.99 on Amazon. I feel that this illustrates the point well, you would effectively be watching the same print as the collector with the Super 8 digital print, but at £2392 less.

[Mike Newell]

Realistically, where would you obtain a negative in private hands that was in pristine condition that could be cut and edited for a 8mm digest. Collectors should accept that any future 8mm releases will have to come via the digital route. Definitely, an distinct improvement on the ham fisted releases that came from a certain dealer with green negative marks and sound faults and blips built into them and galling described as new.

I take your point £300 for a digital 8mm digest is steep but to each their own.

Funny, watched Gone with the Wind on Blu ray recently. Brilliant print much better than super 8 version but it is turgid stuff. Grossly overrated and at least a hour too long in length. Having three directors with different styles doesn’t help. Donated to charity shop as it isn’t best seller in any format.

[Osi Osgood]

I had a print that I sold for a friend of "Gone With The Wind, Derann, I believe, and it really good, but I certainly agree, a fairly overrated film.

[Steve Klare]

I saw those digitally sourced prints at CineSea: even on that big screen they were spectacular.

This is where we start to get into philosophy: if you watch a film printed from a Blu-Ray, are you really watching a film or the blu-ray...(...or are you really watching the blu-ray watching the original film?) It's one of those "sound of one hand clapping" kinds of things!

This can go in all sorts of directions: Many people would ask why I bother with the Derann Toy Story print I have when the same material is available on disk for less than a hot pizza? The same logic might ask why spend a mortgage payment equivalent on a used, likely worn print when the disk is new, pristine and cheap?

-by the way: These are really just rhetorical questions. The best answer I can give you is it's your money: spend it on whatever makes you happy. (...within certain moral, ethical and legal limits!)

You can spend $40,000 restoring a 50 year old car when brand new ones are out there that are safer, more reliable, more comfortable, more durable and more economical. -just don't try to explain it to other people that don't get it!

Personally I am basically OK with digital sourcing and there are a couple of short films I would like to take in that direction. They are all films that were originated for 16mm projection and I want to experience them that way.

It is possible somebody might digitally bootleg a rare print and try to sell it as "vintage" someday, but it would be almost a work of art to get away with it. Besides: you could only pull it off once before it was obvious what you were up to (...and who counterfeits ONE $100 bill?)

[Lee Mannering]

We buried the Video vs Film in the UK years ago but I have enjoyed experimenting putting some of my own HD video of film fairs/Derann onto S8 for another short documentary. Its all been very uphill but after months of experiments it can be done and well.

[Brian Fretwell]

I take your point £300 for a digital 8mm digest is steep but to each their own.

There was a 400ft (Jumbo Giant) Mountain print from the 1970's at Blackpool that still had its price sticker of £34 on. When put through an inflation price calculator it came up as now being £285. That puts current prices into perspective!!!

[Melvin England]

Lee - After seeing for the first time those two digitally sourced super 8 trailers that were shown at Blackpool, I thought the result was staggering! Putting aside the politics of the situation, if the super 8 fraternity can largely agree that this is an acceptable road to go down in the future, this could seriously be a new dawning for the 400'/600' cut down. Imagine, 3 month old films on your GS1200 !

[Osi Osgood]

I really liked the logic behind the "old car" analogy. That's us cine collectors in a nutshell! (and the nut is thoroughly cracked!)

[Mike Newell]

I think new releases are the way forward. A steady flow might correct the imbalance in outrageous prices on old titles.

[Osi Osgood]

Especially when comparing them to original cine material for the negative because, honestly, cine negative material will pale in comparison to digitally sourced materials. As a person who released super for the collectors on the past, if the materials available, could have been digital instead of ole school cine negative material, I would most certainly went with digital.