quote: Dylan Carroll

---

Does any one have any experience doing a DCP screening of the original trilogy - not an official re release, but on a film by film basis? Imagine it might be kind of tough, just looking for some feelers.

---

quote: Marcel Birgelen

---

Even if you get the permission from the studio (it's Disney nowadays, you won't get permission)

---

quote: Victor Liorentas

---

Fox policy in Canada is No dvd or Blu-ray allowed.

---

quote:

---

Fox no longer distributes the films you need to contact either Lucas or Disney.

---

quote: Michael Kurtzke

---

Same here in the US for us. The Star Wars films were 35mm Only when we tried to book them.

---

quote: Mark Ogden

---

The original trilogy is still controlled by Fox, in spite of the Disney deal, and they are free to license and distribute same for all theatrical/non-thearical/home video without Disney approval.

---

Maybe they still hold the rights, but I was referred to Disney. Disney practically never allows you to show something that's not currently in release... Given their increasing market share by acquisitions over the years, that's more than a little frightening.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-18-2015, 09:49 AM:
 
I have not found that to be true. Outside of the "big" animated titles and anything Pixar, Disney has some availability of older titles, though often not great prints. I have booked Mary Poppins and Bedknobs & Broomsticks (not my picks...I just booked them) within the last couple of years. Both prints had issues, but the titles are available.
 

---

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 04-18-2015, 10:04 AM:
 
Well, yes... they *might* be willing to give you some classics, but even a main feature from a few years ago is practically always a no-go.

If somebody can explain the logic behind this concept to me, then I'm all euh... ears.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-18-2015, 11:12 AM:
 
I don't know if this is still formally their policy, but Disney used to have a marketing strategy of doing a major re-release of their mega-classics at set intervals, effectively as if they were new movies, and keeping those titles totally unavailable (legally) on any medium during the intervening period. I'm guessing the rationale was that if customers did not have the chance to see these films most of the time, they would make the effort to do so at the periodic re-releases and that this would boost those theatrical grosses.

On the subject of Disney, a guy I used to know in England has a pristine, 1947 16mm diacetate IB print of Song of the South. When I projected it for him (in 2007 or '08) it looked better than any 16mm print of that vintage had any right to - sharp, clear, no shrinkage/vertical weave that I could see and the audio was not bad, either. A while later, he told me that plans were afoot to show it as part of a university conference about racism, and asked me about the logistics of installing a projector in a lecture theatre that didn't have one.

Long story short - Disney's lawyers sent warning shot letters to the university when the provisional schedule was announced, and despite the university's own legal department advising that under the fair use/fair dealing and educational use provisions of British copyright law, their claim that the screening qualified on both counts would have been virtually bulletproof, the institution still backed off and canceled the screening.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 04-18-2015, 12:57 PM:
 
I don't know about UK laws but does fair use ordinarily allow use of an entire work? Perhaps an album cover, newsworthy photo, or movie poster where there simply is no substitute, but an entire movie, not just excerpts?
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 04-18-2015, 08:02 PM:
 
of the few times the AFI Silver has recently shown any of Episodes IV-VI - it's always been 35mm - I didn't think Fox had DCP's for theatrical exhibition of those
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 04-18-2015, 08:05 PM:
 
U.S. Copyright Office - Fair Use

quote:

---

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair.

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
The nature of the copyrighted work
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between what is fair use and what is infringement in a particular case will not always be clear or easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

Copyright protects the particular way authors have expressed themselves. It does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in a work.

The safest course is to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.

When it is impracticable to obtain permission, you should consider avoiding the use of copyrighted material unless you are confident that the doctrine of fair use would apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine whether a particular use may be considered fair nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.



FL-102, Reviewed June 2012

---

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

I don't know if this is still formally their policy, but Disney used to have a marketing strategy of doing a major re-release of their mega-classics at set intervals, effectively as if they were new movies, and keeping those titles totally unavailable (legally) on any medium during the intervening period. I'm guessing the rationale was that if customers did not have the chance to see these films most of the time, they would make the effort to do so at the periodic re-releases and that this would boost those theatrical grosses.

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

How does one get invited to that sort of thing?

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

How big was the screen?

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

How was the print [of "Star Wars"]?

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

How big was the screen?

---

Not huge, but not tiny, either. (The screening was held at the Crest in the Westwood neighborhood of Los Angeles.)

*I was informed it was a 1979 IB Tech print with the revised opening scroll. However, that information betrays a plausible timeline, so I cannot comment on the vintage of the print except to say it was the original (pre-1997 Special Edition) cut.
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 04-22-2015, 08:11 AM:
 
Back in the early 1990's, I projected a privately owned (not by me) IB Tech print of Star Wars for a private late night show at theatre here New Jersey. It was an original 1977 British print, with the later "New Hope" scroll physically spliced in. It has been a long time, so I don't remember much detail, but what I remember most was how deep and rich the black levels were in the print compared to the Eastman Color prints that were floating around at the time.
 

---

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 04-22-2015, 12:37 PM:
 
Mitchell...I tried to suggest to my friend who had attended the "Star Wars" screening that if they in fact ran an IB Tech print then it would've been from '77 and had the opening scroll spliced in from an Eastman print struck later just like you described. But he'd have none of that! He was adamant the print was from 1979 and that the opening was splice free.

The plausible timeline betrayal I alluded to (if it wasn't obvious) is that I believe (1) the scroll wasn't revised until 1981, and (2) the IB Tech process had been discontinued by 1979.

On a related note, yesterday I received a private message from a Film-Tech member in response to this discussion claiming the 1979 print claim was plausible. I'm not sure why said member was reluctant to post right here in this thread for others to see and chime in on. I guess he must not have been confident in his claim.
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 04-22-2015, 01:34 PM:
 
As far as I know, 1974 was the last year for IB Tech in the USA, and 1977 was the last year for IB Tech in England. I have heard rumors that the dye-transfer line was kept running a few years longer in Italy, but I have never came across any solid evidence to support that rumor. As far as I know, the Bejing IB lab was not started until sometime in the 1980's.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-22-2015, 05:30 PM:
 

quote: article posted by Manny

---

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair.

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
The nature of the copyrighted work
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

---

quote: Mike Heenan

---

I have an IB of Star Wars and was approached last year to lend my print for the LA screening but I could never make it work schedule wise. My print is missing reel 1 but complete otherwise in decent shape (was cleaned recently at a lab). I was told by the previous owner that the reel 1 he misplaced had an Agfa title scroll spliced in the print. Another collector friend in Chicago hosted a private screening of a supposedly mint IB print and that print had the original title scroll still intact. There can't be too many of those floating around.

---

According to George Lucas, they all went into the sun, together with the negatives... which somehow needed to be irreparably altered for the Special Editions...

For those not owning prints that should not exist, a bunch of devoted geeks actually created high quality (Full HD) digital restorations of all three movies, called the "Despecialized Editions". They come in .mkv format and diligently fix the damage being done after years of Lucasification. You can even chose between the original stereo mix and a 6-track mix pulled from one of the 70mm blowup releases. While it fixes all of Lucas alterations, it also fixes stuff that haunted pre-special edition releases for years, like visible matte lines and garbage mattes.

They are around there, somewhere. May the Force help you find them.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 05-08-2015, 12:02 PM:
 
Do you mean this version?

Actually, the Goldring G800 cartridge he plays the record with is one that is widely used by professional archivists for transferring some types of coarsegroove records, because it was designed to operate at a significantly higher tracking force than most moving magnet designs, and because they were made in large quantities (they were the stock OEM cartridge supplied with the GL75 and GL78 turntables), with the result that used ones can be picked up cheaply and in good condition. I use one with an 0.0025 elliptical stylus for most of my 78 transfers.
 

---

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 05-09-2015, 06:11 AM:
 
If you want some more modern cartridge with high amount of tracking force, there are tons of options available, thanks to the whole dance and hip hop scene and their continuing interest in vinyl.

But yeah, that transfer looks and sounds like the real thing. But thanks to this YouTube clip, I now know they actually made projector toys with some actual Star Wars Super8 footage inside. Awesome.

But no, I'm referring to this version which was primarily sourced from the Blu-Ray releases, but used various sources to restore the original versions of those movies as close as possible. You could say that they probably put more collective efforts into this than Lucasfilm ever did.

P.S.: The "reconstructed 70mm sound track" sounds a lot better and way more dynamic than both the DVD and BluRay releases ever did.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 05-15-2015, 01:37 PM:
 

quote: Marcel Birgelen

---

If you want some more modern cartridge with high amount of tracking force, there are tons of options available, thanks to the whole dance and hip hop scene and their continuing interest in vinyl.

---

quote:

---

OK, but can you get elliptical styli between 0.0015 and 0.0070 inch radius styli for them (needed to play coarsegroove records)? I've yet to see a hip hop DJ playing Edison hill-and-dale records, or early HMV acoustics! That having been said, I know a DJ who plays 78s, but I suspect that if Jenny unleashed any hip-hop at the sort of gig she gets booked for, the result would be similar to a typical event which features hip hop: fatalities, only this time from age-related heart attacks rather than drugs and shooting!

---

Sorry, I totally missed your answer on this one.
I'm not sure if it really matters today if you're using elliptical v.s. spherical styli for those old records, since pickup technology has improved tremendously. True audio aficionados will probably go for the elliptical versions, whereas your local hip-hop DJ surely wants to go for a spherical one.

Ortofon still produces a range of mono styli for several types of old records, including those with a wider grove profile which work fine with recent turntables.

Actually, I'm pretty sure you get decent results with almost any old coarsegroove record and a modern Concorde pickup given the large amount of tracking force of those, but I guess you're potentially damaging the vinyl this way.

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

Seriously, the G800 and a mono derivative of a mass-produced Shure cartridge (the M78) are very popular options for digitizing coarsegroove records, mainly because there are retired jewelers and engineers out there who make and sell the full range of styli for them. I'm guessing that only microgroove styli are made for the majority of cartridges used by today's DJs.

---

As you can see, there are still cartridges being made for "specialty purposes", compatible with "current" technology. My best guess is that they will keep making them even after your local DJ ditched his last piece of vinyl. People still want to be able to play their old records and as long as there is a critical mass out there, there is still sufficient business in this considerable niche. Vinyl will probably outlast the audio casette, VHS and even CD as a somewhat "common" medium.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-01-2015, 08:56 AM:
 

quote: Marcel Birgelen

---

Ortofon still produces a range of mono styli for several types of old records, including those with a wider grove profile which work fine with recent turntables.

---