Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Damaged Print Cost

This is topic Damaged Print Cost in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000785

Posted by John Carpenter (Member # 1488) on 04-12-2003, 05:51 PM:

Has anyone had an "unfortunate" experience where they had to replace an entire print due to "operator error"? Where you ever informed how much this cost the company? Just as a point, in 3 years here this is a first...

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 04-12-2003, 06:22 PM:

I destroyed Dennis The Menace (sp) . I just chalked it up as a training error since it was my first year in the booth. Was told it cost about $1200 to replace. I have no idea if that was the truth or not.

Posted by John Carpenter (Member # 1488) on 04-12-2003, 06:53 PM:

Thanks - that is about what I had always heard (about 200 a reel) but I dont know. We had our head projectionist training someone last night and the trainee must have misthreaded something that the trainer somehow didn't catch. At least we normally have a really good record here unlike some theatres I have visited in the past.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 04-12-2003, 07:04 PM:

Has anyone ever asked for proof of a print being destroyed after having to pay for its replacement? If I ever damage a print I'd probably demand some proof before handing over any money.

BTW, John Pytlak has mentioned many times in the past that a print costs the studio about $300 a week with a lifetime of about 4 weeks, so $1200 sounds right.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 04-12-2003, 07:16 PM:

Large format 870/1570 40-minute prints can cost $20,000.00 or more to replace. Most theatres and maintenance companies have print damage and replacement insurance.

>>> Phil

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 04-12-2003, 08:10 PM:

It might cost the studio $1,200 to run off a release print but I'm pretty sure they'd charge the theatre more than that for a replacement, sort of a punitive measure. The only time we've had to order a new reel in the last six years because of damage done at the theatre it cost us $400.

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 04-12-2003, 10:30 PM:

I think we had to replace some reels of Chicken Run due to a novice mistake one of our now-seasoned operators made using Speco 270 platters. He forgot to turn on the take up button and walked away from the machine without checking if everything was OK. Needless to say, the film piled up into a massive heap before wrapping backwards around the intermittent [Eek!]

.

All the Chief-of-Staff (3rd in charge) wanted to know was how long until I could have it back on again. I told him bluntly he was [sex]

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-12-2003, 10:38 PM:

You have an unattended booth without failsafes? Shame, shame! [Smile]

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 04-12-2003, 11:18 PM:

No, No, Not Now!

To make a long story short, we had just added these new auditoriums onto our existing infrastructure and all of us were getting used to the Speco products. Not all the failsafes were hooked up as our company policy is: Seats and Screen = Show (that says a lot if you read into it). Currently all of our equipment is wired with failsafe protection.

Also, our booth is not unattended, but it is divided into three rooms. In defense of the operator and with respect to the time block he was starting shows, there was no possible way he could have returned to the room the problem occured in. He was literally on the otherside of the booth. As head projectionist I stay in the booth for 90% of my shift and my example does wear off on the others. Thats a testament to their dedication as well [beer]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-13-2003, 03:44 AM:

A little tip, if a studio wants you to pay for a damaged print, you have a certain amount of legal right to demand the damaged item be returned to you for inspection and since you are paying for it...it's yours! So what do you want Mr. Studio, my money or your damaged print? Stand your ground on keeping that print and you have great odds you won't be paying for it if it was a one time accident. People like Valenti have brainwashed the studios into thinking that if there is one single print out in the public somewhere that could be bootlegged, it will be and it will cost the industry billions and billions of dollars. As a result, the studio will generally choose the print be returned (so they can destroy the already destroyed print themselves). Of course never mind the "Academy screener" DVDs and videotapes that are sent out by the case of movies still in theaters. It's those damn prints that are the problem! Videos and DVDs are way too hard to copy to be a threat. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 04-13-2003, 09:12 AM:

You might not be entitled to the keep the damaged print, depending on what their claim is. according to an acquaintance who is an attorney. According to him, since the print is being rented, their claim is for their loss, also the agreement contract with the studio, distributors etc. probably doesn't allow the theatre to take ownership at all under any circumstances.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-13-2003, 01:54 PM:

I said a certain amount of legal right. Seen it happen multiple times where the theater side held their ground demanding to keep the damaged item they were paying for and was excused from paying. Remember, if the theater always takes care of their film and every once in a blue moon something happens on a wide release, it's not the end of the world for the studio. Screwing around with a payment vs. a print debate isn't worth their hassle much of the time. Plus there is the whole counter argument of "the print was going to be destroyed anyway" as well as a grudge between the theater and the studio which could affect the studio's future bookings in that location or chain. Since these prints have become throwaway items (not repertory or indie stuff), it's really not worth fighting the rare accident when the theater otherwise returns nice prints. You would also hear of a LOT of billings for damaged prints if this wasn't the case.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 04-13-2003, 02:17 PM:

I think any arguments about "legal" rights are on very sketchy ground, and we're probably best off not trying to have that discussion... (I will say no more on this topic).

In any case, this whole issue is very much complicated by the fact that the cost to produce an entire print is not all terribly much related to the value of the print.

For instance, let's say you damaged a print of Basic today. It opened 2 weekends ago in 2,876 theatres and is playing in 2,246 theatres today (that's theatres, not screens, per Box Office Mojo). So that's at least 630 prints that are sitting around doing nothing that are unlikely to ever be wanted again. If you damaged a print today and Sony tried to charge you $1,200, you'd have a very good argument to tell them they were being unreasonable. (One expects them to charge shipping, of course).

So pretty much the only time you could be reasonably stuck with the full cost of the print is at the beginning of the run (all prints are playing in first run theatres "on the break"), or at the end of the run or in repertory, when you can assume that the excess prints have been junked.

Dustin Mitchell said, "but I'm pretty sure they'd charge the theatre more than that for a replacement, sort of a punitive measure". How "sure" is "pretty sure"? I'd be quite curious to see details of such punitive charges. What studio charged you $400 for a single reel? Are you sure of that number, or might it have been either anecdotal or a threat that was never followed through?

--jhawk

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 04-13-2003, 04:48 PM:

It was reel for of 'The Skulls,' a universal release. The charge showed up on our P&L's.

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 04-14-2003, 08:44 AM:

In addition to the paranoia of bootlegging which Brad mentioned in his suggestion that the theater demand the print they are paying for, there's also the "doctrine of first sale" which MANY 16mm collectors have hidden behind. Basically, it's a case that if a distributor ever sold a print of a title as was formerly done with libraries and educational institutions he can't then turn around and prosecute someone else who owns a print because (i) who knows it wasn't the print he legally sold, and (ii) you opened the floodgates by legally selling a print, so now you can't complain that someone owns one. That's the primary reason that it was more common to use life of print leases in those situations.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-14-2003, 10:32 AM:

Here's a recent price list from a smaller lab:

http://www.colorlab.com/prices/pl2003.pdf

Of course, higher volumes of release prints usually can negotiate lower prices.

Current catalog price of 35mm Kodak VISION Color Print Film 2383 is about 9 cents ($0.09) per foot (raw stock).

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-14-2003, 10:58 AM:

quote:
I destroyed Dennis The Menace (sp) .

Congratulations on your good taste! [Big Grin]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-14-2003, 04:05 PM:

quote:
So pretty much the only time you could be reasonably stuck with the full cost of the print is at the beginning of the run (all prints are playing in first run theatres "on the break"), or at the end of the run or in repertory, when you can assume that the excess prints have been junked.

Well put John. That was what I was inferring about the "wide print" a couple of days ago, but you put it so much better.

I also agree the specific legalities of this is one of those discussions that really won't go anywhere, so unless anyone else has a story to tell, we're probably off not continuing that aspect of this thread.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-14-2003, 06:55 PM:

Do distributors order "extra" prints, with the expectation that some small percentage of a large production run will either be defective, or be damaged, and thus need replacement in that first week or so of release? Do the labs themselves automatically run some small percentage of extras to cover lab defects? I guess another way of asking this is, if you screen a print on Thursday night and find that a reel is bad, and you contact the distributor for a replacement, where is that replacement coming from?

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-15-2003, 01:46 AM:

The size of the production run is probably the key to it. The more prints there were to start with, the more likely I'd guess it would be that spares will become available and that (assuming the damage doesn't happen during the opening weekend) the perpetrator of an accident won't have to pay.

If a replacement print is needed, then that'll have to be done on a one-off basis and probably by a smaller lab, which will obviously be more expensive per unit than a production run of a thousand or so. All the extra overheads, like shipping the interneg to the lab, setting up the printer, grading (unless the interneg itself has been graded for one-light release printing) and so on, will be incurred just for that one print.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 04-15-2003, 02:08 AM:

Dave, I usually get my replacement reels sent from the film depot. They are shipped same day bus or courier. As far as I know they just take the reels from a spare number of prints. How many spares they keep is probably based on the percentage of the total prints.

I'd assume that the distributor would charge the cost back to the lab for prints with printing defects, but I really don't know. The labs might only guarantee a certain number of no-defect reels where the distributor might swallow the cost for a small number of defects. For prints that are damaged by theatres, the distributor swallows the cost or charges the theatre. I've never damaged a print so I can't say how often a theatre actually gets charged.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-15-2003, 03:34 AM:

quote:
For prints that are damaged by theatres, the distributor swallows the cost or charges the theatre.

...and in some cases, there won't be any cost to swallow (apart from shipping). Let's say that Big Blockbuster III opens with a 1,000 prints. After a week, 150 theatres drop it and one of the remaining ones trashes their print. Presumably there are now 150 surplus good copies sitting in depots, so there is no need to get any new prints made.

On the other hand, let's take a French arthouse movie. Let's make this a worst-possible scenario: only three prints were made to start with, and all were imported across the Atlantic from France. The film is black-and-white, over three hours long, and had laser subtitles put on it in New York before going into distribution. Each of those three prints has a year of back-to-back three day bookings lined up. Then a university film society trashes their print. I hope they're well insured.

Cost of a 15,000 foot b/w print made at a small lab in Paris, flown across the Atlantic and then subtitled? [evil]

Posted by Steven Pickles (Member # 785) on 04-17-2003, 10:04 AM:

John C,

Which print of yours was damaged? I'd just like to know out of curiosity.

Steven

Posted by John Carpenter (Member # 1488) on 04-17-2003, 02:26 PM:

Steven - Check your email... and for the others, let me put it this way - This was the first chance to use Sony's new 800 number since they switched from TES to ETS and after a call on Saturday afternoon we had a new print delivered to us that night - great service as far as I'm concerened! [thumbsup]

Posted by John Carpenter (Member # 1488) on 05-01-2003, 04:54 PM:

For those of you who are interested... we found out we are being charged $1680 for the damage!! [Eek!]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-02-2003, 08:57 AM:

quote:
For those of you who are interested... we found out we are being charged $1680 for the damage!!

How long was the print? For example, if the print was 2 hours long (10,800 feet plus leaders), you were charged less than 16 cents ($0.16 US) per foot.

Posted by John Carpenter (Member # 1488) on 05-02-2003, 09:51 AM:

quote:
How long was the print? For example, if the print was 2 hours long (10,800 feet plus leaders), you were charged less than 16 cents ($0.16 US) per foot.

The film was just shy of 2 hours

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-02-2003, 10:36 AM:

Seems like a fair price then if it was due to carelessness. It was an expensive mistake, but a learning experience.