my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » What is a bandsaw print? (Page 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: What is a bandsaw print? Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 04-07-2003 11:51 PM                  Brad & Scott: Right on target! I get tired of the implications too. It's like saying your guilty of rape when your dick was cut-off by Ms. Bobbitt. I fully believe that if it wasn't for all the "stolen", etc., rhetoric, that the F*cking Idiot Jack(off) Valenti spews, he would be selling peanuts at Dodger Stadium where he belongs! And the industry would be better off! I'd say selling Hot Dogs, but I would never think of demeaning my friend Paul, the Weenie Man! Valenti is the most a arrogant, uniformed idiot I have ever met! He …Awww the hell with it!! I got my point across!!!! HAhahahahhaah And John, I think we all get it by now. We know you MUST tow the "company" line… and we understand that. Jhawk: While I agree it's the copyright holder's prerogative to do with their property as they wish, it still REALLY bugs me when I see an "edited for content" of for whatever of the original film. I think Bravo is the worst sinner of this! Also, I have a TBC, professional VCRs, AND a telecine projection system… BUT I DO NOT pirate films... >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Hillary Charles Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 748 From: York, PA, USA Registered: Feb 2001 posted 04-08-2003 06:10 AM                     Once, in film school, we had a visit from someone from a minor production company who explained various aspects of the business. I asked him about the storage of the completed film materials. His response was that the company will store the film until THEY decide it should no longer exist (when it doesn't make any money for them). I found this a very myopic attitude. There's no argument that the copyright holder owns a given project, but we're not talking a SEARS portrait. A movie produced with the intention of public consumption inherently becomes a shared cultural possession. There's no argument that if there's money to be made from it, it should be through those who legally own the rights. I do take issue with their insistense to destroy 35mm prints because of some archaic fear of piracy. By the time those prints are to be discarded en masse, the video versions are out. If I can by and copy a $14.95 DVD with EXCELLENT quality, why in the world would I go through the effort of trying to transfer a print which may show some wear and tear? Once a film leaves the theaters, those prints are of no value to the studios OR pirates. I just don't understand this fear that a print in private hands somehow hurts the studio financially. Conversely, it is more likely that someone watching that print may enjoy the movie enough to go out and buy a video of it. Valenti should get with the times and understand where the real threats are. That threat is not the collector, who on occasion has provided priceless restoration footage, and worked with the AFI to recover "lost" films. The threat does not exist on film, but on video, and the studios are providing pirates with the PERFECT masters through legally purchased product.  |  IP: Logged Dan Lyons Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 698 From: Seal Beach, CA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 04-08-2003 12:27 PM                     I know some people will take offense at this, but oh well, it's just my take on things. It seems to me that the studio heads who think that collectors pirate films have their heads in the sand. With DVD anyone can get the software and copy DVDs on their home computer. No one would bother to buy transfer a film to DVD,when they can just go to Blockbuster, rent a movie then copy the DVD to DVD and get all the "extras" with it. These studio and Valenti types are really out of it; living in the past. I wonder if they even know how to use a computer! Danny  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 04-08-2003 03:13 PM                        Like I've said elsewhere, I think it is quite amusing that Jacky-poo talked at ShoWest about how the industry hasn't grown this much since 1942 or something like that and the industry made 16 trillion gazillion dollars in profit last year. After that he went into his anti-piracy speech. Piracy will DESTROY the industry! OH NO! RUN AND HIDE! Yes, copyright holders do indeed have thre right to say what happens with their products. But let's face it, they are absolute morons if they think they can actually control it. Once a movie is out on DVD, it's gonna be copied. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. There is absolutely nothing that can be done and the studios take that risk and release their material anyway. Why? Because the majority of the people will not copy the intellectual property and the studios will still make lots and lots of profit. I wouldn't encourage piracy but in no means do I think the industry will collapse because of it. And film collectors are about 1/1,000,000th of a threat (or less) than people who pirate. When Jacky-poo thows out figures about how much money he supposedly lost to piracy, how does he know? Does he think that everyone who views a pirated video would have actually paid to see that movie? How does he know how much money people actually make off of pirating? What would he do with the extra money? If someone didn't buy a cheap pirated copy what makes him think they would buy the full copy? I think there are more important things in the world to be concerned about rather than film collectors showing a few prints. Look at our economy. When someone makes a big deal about film collectors, I laugh at them because they are funny.  |  IP: Logged Tom Doyle Expert Film Handler Posts: 176 From: Bristol, CT, USA Registered: Nov 2002 posted 04-16-2003 11:14 PM                     Here's a small triumph for all the film collectors out there from a story in today's papers: The Museum of Television & Radio announced Tuesday that a 16mm print of the 1954 jury room drama "Twelve Angry Men" has been located. It was thought that this thriller no longer existed, but a film copy of the kinoscope was found in the estate of a private collector. Ok, I guess this isn't really earth-shattering to anyone in the film business. Everyone is probably much more familiar with the movie version that came out three years later. However, this story points out the same problem that the film industry had - they didn't save everything. Even more interesting is that this print was acquired *legally* - which may be true of many old film prints in the hands of collectors. http://www.nj.com/entertainment/ledger/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/1050475120104300.xml  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.