|
|
Post by Jaspal Cheema on Mar 18, 2012 22:21:09 GMT
I recently bought the suberb BFI release 'PORTRAIT OF A PEOPLE' which is a collection of public information films produced by the ministry of information (now the central office of information and still going strong-think of all those John Hurt voiced AIDS adverts of the last 20 years).This was a govenment funded film unit which had a central film archive in kensington and distributed 16mm film prints all over the British Isles to disseminate information on a wide variety of topics from farming to town planning.One of the films on the DVD is called 'Shown by Request' and it shows how a film archive and distribution centre was run in the pre-computer age and gives a flavour of how the BBC archives at Villiers House may have functioned.It shows films being checked against index cards etc and the actual layout of a film archive building-the rooms have a 'flow' so as to faciliate the movement of prints from checking in, to cleaning,to storage and so on.
One of the main functions of the archive was the cleaning of prints after they have been returned from the individuals who have requested them.In particular it shows how fragile 16mm film was-after 1 showing the films would come back with terrible scratches and holes from where the film had been miss-aligned on the projector.If the film was beyond repair it is shown being just chucked in the bin!But this made me wonder,could prints of missing Dr Who episodes be similarly junked by private collectors when their prints were no longer viable,not knowing the value of the item they were junking?How long would it have been before someone like Bruce Grenville,who had absolutely no idea of the value of 'The Lion' junked his print before it was discovered by a Who fan?It came back from New Zealand in terrible state and was only just salvagable by the Restoration Team.Did the BBC similarly junk prints that came back from foreign stations because they too were un-playable and un-able to restore in the pre-digital age?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Mar 18, 2012 22:51:49 GMT
As we have no way of knowing, it's probably best not to think about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steven Sigel on Mar 18, 2012 22:54:57 GMT
The Lion is nowhere near in junking condition. However, I junk prints all the time when I buy collections - mainly if they have vinegar and are no longer projectable. I wouldn't junk something just for scratches. You never know when you might need replacement footage...
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Mar 19, 2012 9:34:27 GMT
I would suspect your question probably determined the fate of videotape rather than film?
They can do wonderous things today of course but this obviously was not always the case and lessons have been learnt in recovering the image.
An operator say twenty years ago presented with an old tape (this apparently happened to 'Adventures of Don Quick' and maybe Callan series2 and Timeslip?) persistantly clogging the heads with the picture breaking up and wandering, would have said it was time to be junked.
Sticking my neck out and say film can always be made playable (unless the image has totally gone) whatever condition its in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steven Sigel on Mar 19, 2012 12:59:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Marple on Mar 19, 2012 18:00:34 GMT
I remember seeing a late Victorian print being scanned frame by frame in a documentry.
|
|
|
|
Post by Greg H on Mar 19, 2012 20:01:48 GMT
I remember watching a documentary on the restoration of a Georges Méliès short. the print from that was in astonishingly bad condition!
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Mar 19, 2012 20:22:08 GMT
A good bath in warm soapy water would soon sort that out  |
|
|
|
Post by Steven Sigel on Mar 19, 2012 20:38:24 GMT
A good bath in warm soapy water would soon sort that out Don't even think such a thing.... This is what happened to a (Dr. Who) print that was "washed " very briefly... Imagine what soaking would do... www.16mm-films.net/who/whodamage.avi |
|
|
|
Post by Louise Penn on Mar 19, 2012 21:54:02 GMT
Cautionary tales about videotapes being junked which could have been saved, with the benefit of forward thinking!
It's possible maybe that private collectors have junked things where they don't realise the value and uniqueness of what they have, but there's not much that can be done about it, especially if no one knows about their collections ...!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Mar 19, 2012 21:56:40 GMT
Erk! Which episode was that, Steve..?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ken Griffin on Mar 19, 2012 22:28:07 GMT
In particular it shows how fragile 16mm film was-after 1 showing the films would come back with terrible scratches and holes from where the film had been miss-aligned on the projector.If the film was beyond repair it is shown being just chucked in the bin!But this made me wonder,could prints of missing Dr Who episodes be similarly junked by private collectors when their prints were no longer viable,not knowing the value of the item they were junking? I wouldn't worry too much about it. No serious collector or archive would dump unique material for the faults you described. Some of the faults would be relatively easy to fix - sprocket damage and torn frames etc. can be easily patched with splicing tape. I suspect that the reason why many of the films in the distribution centre was junked was simply that it was too time-consuming or troublesome to repair them. The scratches would also be an issue for exhibition, although they wouldn't really be one for a collector. The centre would have lots of prints of these films and demand for titles would drop over time, so you could service your engagements with a reducing number of prints so there was little pressure for them to repair damaged prints. In addition, they could easy strike fresh prints from the original negative if things were problematic. The main issue that would render films unusuable as Steven has highlighted is the vinegar syndrome and the semi-related issue of shrinkage, where the film can shrink to such an extent that it is impossible to retrieve its contents without specialised equipment and plenty of money. |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Marple on Mar 19, 2012 22:31:49 GMT
One problem that could occour when a collector dies & their relatives don't realise how potentially valuable their collection is, especially if mostly consists of 20-30 year old off-air recordings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Mar 19, 2012 23:39:09 GMT
A good bath in warm soapy water would soon sort that out Don't even think such a thing.... This is what happened to a (Dr. Who) print that was "washed " very briefly... Imagine what soaking would do... www.16mm-films.net/who/whodamage.aviWell your missing out on something Steve. I have certainly washed prints in soapy water in a bathtub, no lasting damage whatsoever. The trick is in the time you take to do it,the squeegee action after to dry it out and not leave watermarks, and of course doing it in a clean enviroment.. But I have dug myself a hole here because your gonna say I am talking ridiculous and it cannot be done... oh well nevermind. |
|
|
|
Post by Ken Griffin on Mar 19, 2012 23:52:04 GMT
Well your missing out on something Steve. I have certainly washed prints in soapy water in a bathtub, no lasting damage whatsoever. You are extremely lucky then. You should get serious emulsion damage from washing prints in that way. I can't see any conceivable benefit of such a technique as opposed to a more sensible one such as using a cloth with some industrial strength alcohol on it. |
|
