'no hiding place' on Ebay

[Steven Sigel]

Joe said:

You could buy as return ticket to New York for £300 - I know if I had the money, I'd rather have that, given the choice. If it had been complete, I'd understand the price. I doubt you'd get £7000 for an IB of GWTW, the 16mm market for features is breaking apart. You can buy the restored DVD for a tenner and I'm sure under domestic conditions the average punter may well not notice much difference if projected by LCD. IB tech 16mm prints are variable and often soft.

Nonesense. The 16mm film market is not doing anything of the sort. I buy and sell a ton of film and prices are up, not down for good quality prints. I'm not going to get into the silly DVD vs film argument with you except to say that they are totally unrelated - DVDs are a mass market medium, while film is a collectors medium. I have a DLP projector along with my film projectors and I like watching both -- but a nice condition IB print on a Xenon projector will blow away a DVD any day.

That price I quoted you for GWTW is what one sold for in the recent past.

[Steven Sigel]

Joe said:

Exclusivity yes, but to what end? What use is the print unless it is screened and if you do, each run through a projector risks damage. An IB tech print of GWTW would be anything from 30 to 60 years old by now and unless pristine could be affected by shrinkage and possibly even vinegar syndrome.

That's utter nonesense.

Vinegar mostly effects prints that were rejeuventated. I've rarely seen a vinegar print that wasn't treated. I've got hundreds of 16mm features, many of which I've had for 20 years .

Why is it that people constantly are bashing film collectors? Have you seen the 16mm IB Tech prints of Gone With the Wind (there are very few of them out there)? If not, then how can you make such a statement.

[Steven Sigel]

Joe said:

Ah yes, but there is a big difference between putting your print through a nice, gentle, loving telecine and putting through the front lines in a home screening using the domestic version of a 'Gatling gun'!

To my eyes, old prints used for DVD (feature films) don't really sparkle unless you get good 35mm sources. 16mm is more unstable than 35mm and many prints circulating on the domestic market are dupes.

You really have it in for film collectors, don't you?
Any particular reason? Did a film collector strangle your dog?

BTW -- there's no such thing as a Technicolor dupe - it's impossible. And in general, dupes make up a small portion of the 16mm prints out there, and are easy to spot.

I do agree that DVDs need to be mastered from 35mm sources whenever possible -- but that is not really relevant.

[Joe Cole]

Nonesense. The 16mm film market is not doing anything of the sort. I buy and sell a ton of film and prices are up, not down for good quality prints.

One look at e-bay shows you have about 200 16mm prints for sale, mostly features, most of them very tasty quality items too and most of them about to expire with no sale. You aren't the only one in this position either.
Now, why is that?

Vinegar mostly effects prints that were rejeuventated. I've rarely seen a vinegar print that wasn't treated. I've got hundreds of 16mm features, many of which I've had for 20 years .

The vinegar syndrome affects prints because the acetate reacts with moisture in the air to form acetic acid. Adding chemical treatments can accelerate this, but it is not specifically the cause of the problem.


Have you seen the 16mm IB Tech prints of Gone With the Wind (there are very few of them out there)? If not, then how can you make such a statement.

No, but any film prints are vulnerable and like any plastic they turn brittle. Although there are many old prints still in use, there is always a risk of damage.

BTW -- there's no such thing as a Technicolor dupe - it's impossible. And in general, dupes make up a small portion of the 16mm prints out there, and are easy to spot.

There are two main categories of dupe. One is the obvious b/w dupe and also dupes of Technicolor films printed on Eastman stock. Many of these Eastman dupe prints of Technicolor films are still sold by dealers. Although they can often be in good condition, they are generally doomed to fade.

[Steven Sigel]

Joe (or whatever your name really is)

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Most of the films that are sold on ebay these days are rubbish -- many collectors do their buying and selling off of ebay. I sell only a small fraction of my total film sales on ebay (and yet, since the beginning of the year, I've sold somewhere around 15,000 pounds worth of films on ebay alone). There haven't been many spectacular titles on ebay in a long while -- the last one was an IB Tech print of "Don Juan" which went for $US 4000.

As for the stuff I have listed on ebay personally (since you seem to know who I am) -- check out my completed sales. The stuff I have up there now are items that I've relisted several times (ebay had a 10 cent fixed listing sale so I relisted them all). I generally sell an average of 30-50% of what I list at any given time. This has been true since I started selling on ebay in 1997. Prices have gone up over that time (for example, in 1997 I was selling Eastman Star Trek episodes for $50; I just saw one sell on ebay for around $200; Munsters episodes were about $25, now they go for $150+; and the same is true for "A" features), and I get new buyers all the time.

Vinegar is caused when the acetate layer of the film breaks down into acetic acid, and becomes self-catylzing. Prints that were rejeuvented (e.g. dipped into a bath of acetic acid to remove scratches) are almost guarenteed to go vinegar. Also prints that were not properly fixed, and prints that are stored in hot humid condittions. I've got thousands of prints and not one has gone vinegar on me in 20 years (that wasn't already going when I got it).

In terms of fading -- pre 1982 Eastman prints fade -- absolutely, but post 1982 prints are on LPP stock (or the equivalent from other manufacturers) which is color-stable (at least for our lifetime).

Dupes of color prints are quite uncommon -- there were a lot of B&W dupes made in the 1970s but as I said, they're easy to spot. There were some color dupes made, but they don't turn up too terribly often - with the exception of a few titles that are fairly common. The vast majority of prints were originally made for rental or for TV use and are originals (regardless of whether they're on Eastman stock or not).

Joe said:

Nonesense. The 16mm film market is not doing anything of the sort. I buy and sell a ton of film and prices are up, not down for good quality prints.

One look at e-bay shows you have about 200 16mm prints for sale, mostly features, most of them very tasty quality items too and most of them about to expire with no sale. You aren't the only one in this position either.
Now, why is that?

Vinegar mostly effects prints that were rejeuventated. I've rarely seen a vinegar print that wasn't treated. I've got hundreds of 16mm features, many of which I've had for 20 years .

The vinegar syndrome affects prints because the acetate reacts with moisture in the air to form acetic acid. Adding chemical treatments can accelerate this, but it is not specifically the cause of the problem.


Have you seen the 16mm IB Tech prints of Gone With the Wind (there are very few of them out there)? If not, then how can you make such a statement.

No, but any film prints are vulnerable and like any plastic they turn brittle. Although there are many old prints still in use, there is always a risk of damage.

BTW -- there's no such thing as a Technicolor dupe - it's impossible. And in general, dupes make up a small portion of the 16mm prints out there, and are easy to spot.

There are two main categories of dupe. One is the obvious b/w dupe and also dupes of Technicolor films printed on Eastman stock. Many of these Eastman dupe prints of Technicolor films are still sold by dealers. Although they can often be in good condition, they are generally doomed to fade.

[Joe Cole]

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Thanks for the blanket generalisation!

The fact you are having to list movies several times (as many do) and that you mention cult titles sell isn't news to me. Some of the material you and others have up 'Lost Horizon' / 'Red River' would have been snapped up years ago in the big reel. People aren't throwing themselves at these, but they do buy what we might term cult tv or cult movies.

Vinegar? You probably take better care of your prints and air them regularly.

LPP? Still prone to fading and doesn't look anything like true IB Tech.

Dupes? Yes, I mean Technicolor IB films that have been copied to Eastman stock. I've seen more than a few features in less than glorious Technicolor.

[Steven Sigel]

You know -- you, and many other DVD collectors, seem to have it in for film. I really don't understand it. There's a whole web site of people who seem to love to bash film and film collectors while extolling the virtues of DVD. Film collectors on the other hand tend to also have DVD and video projectors, and rarely (if ever) do you see us bashing DVDs.

I don't own a print of "Red River" - so I have no idea what you are talking about there. The print of Lost Horizon is the "Shangri-la" version which is the shorter version (the restored prints go for around $750). But even so, it will sell eventually - it all depends on who happens to be looking. I've had some stuff sit around for years before it eventually sold. Other stuff just flys out before it ever is listed anywhere.


If you don't like film, don't collect it -- but please stop bashing those of us who do.

And as for LPP fading -- where do you get that idea?

Joe said:

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Thanks for the blanket generalisation!

The fact you are having to list movies several times (as many do) and that you mention cult titles sell isn't news to me. Some of the material you and others have up 'Lost Horizon' / 'Red River' would have been snapped up years ago in the big reel. People aren't throwing themselves at these, but they do buy what we might term cult tv or cult movies.

Vinegar? You probably take better care of your prints and air them regularly.

LPP? Still prone to fading and doesn't look anything like true IB Tech.

Dupes? Yes, I mean Technicolor IB films that have been copied to Eastman stock. I've seen more than a few features in less than glorious Technicolor.

[Joe Cole]

You make the assumptions that I'm bashing film collectors. They appear to have cut their own throats by amassing large film collections which have many disadvantages over digital media and few benefits. Unfortunately, many appear to be in denial in the same way that laserdisc collectors enthused over their toys before DVD swept them away.

For a few years the disc collectors could argue that their analog discs were better in many ways than vanilla DVD releases, but you never hear much from them now.

Similarly, Super 8mm is now an archaic medium. Only 16mm struggles on because it is the last bastion. The gem of the domestic formats and always the most expensive.

You mention films sitting for years, which isn't an indication that the market is booming. It is probably good for cult titles, but clearing those classic features is a problem.

Although screening 16mm side by side with LCD would show that film is superior, the way things are going, it will be hard to tell the difference.

You might pay £7000 for GWTW, but that cost would give a movie buff an enormous number of DVDs. It is hard to believe that the IB print could give as much pleasure to the owner unless he or she was more interested in owning the print than actually deriving any entertainment value from it. Either that or they are wealthy enough to accept this as a small addition to a vast film collection.

As for LPP stock. It does fade. It is low fade, not 'no fade'. It is far less stable than post 1928 IB Tech. Many collectors have noticed this. e,g.

Of course, new technology may not always be the panacea that
it first appears to be. For example, low-fade LPP color stock was
once ushered in to greatly improve the cyan limiting dye-factor
in earlier 5383 or 5381 Eastman color print films. The improved
cyan dye was expected to last up to 50 times longer than that of
a conventional magenta-stable Eastman print. But even prints
manufactured just 12 years ago have begun showing some loss of
cyan density in the black area of the transparent image. In a
properly timed print with good contrast, the black area should be
composed of equal densities of the three dye layers. The extent
to which the cyan layer has a lower density than the more stable
magenta layer in a faded print represents the amount of fading
which has occurred in each layer over the years.

[Stuart Douglas]

Guest said:

Rest assured that this print is safe and will shortly be in the hands of the NFTVA. It is hoped that there will be a public screening in the near future for those who are interested in seeing it in full.

<applauds>Excellent news</applauds>

[Steven Sigel]

The LPP quote you mention is (I belive) from an article that Paul Robley wrote some time ago. It has never been substantiated.

Your argument that films sitting around for years is a problem is specious - you neglect the fact that for every print that sits around, I've sold 20 others. I have NEVER sold a print at a loss. Just try selling a used DVD and see whether you make a profit or not.

Your post is in fact a bashing post -- "They appear to have cut their own throats by amassing large film collections which have many disadvantages over digital media and few benefits. Unfortunately, many appear to be in denial in the same way that laserdisc collectors enthused over their toys before DVD swept them away. "

What disadvantages would those be?

Laser Discs were another mass market format and you can't compare them to 16mm films, which were not made for mass market . Film is a collectors hobby. It's like comparing Apples and Armadillos.

[Joe Cole]

Disadvantages of 16mm?

Oh just a few general things.....

cost, color fading, projector noise, optical sound, usually unrestored elements, reel changing, equipment maintenance, lack of spares, weight issues, space and storage issues, lack of new material, vinegar syndrome, shrinkage, portability

benefits?

only really the niche collector market and picture quality.

[Joe Cole]

Laser Discs were another mass market format

Did you ever see the stores stacked with them?

[Steven Sigel]

Joe said:

Laser Discs were another mass market format

Did you ever see the stores stacked with them?

Yes.

[Steven Sigel]

Joe said:

Disadvantages of 16mm?

Oh just a few general things.....

cost, color fading, projector noise, optical sound, usually unrestored elements, reel changing, equipment maintenance, lack of spares, weight issues, space and storage issues, lack of new material, vinegar syndrome, shrinkage, portability

benefits?

only really the niche collector market and picture quality.

I'm not going to argue every point with you -- it's clear that you don't like film. That's fine. But I really find it insulting that you keep implying that film colletors are somehow stupid and should buy DVDs instead. Why are you on a crusade to convince people to stop collecting film?

[Joe Cole]

But not to the extent of VHS. It (Laserdisc) was a luxury product. Magazines extolled the virtues of disc collecting in contrast to the inferior VHS.