This is topic Ebay IDIOT ALERT! in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=000278

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 05-16-2001, 12:31 AM:
 

Paging Mr. Valenti...

Heres a great Ebay deal in stolen property:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1431366437


Claims the print is quad-track with DTS disks, even! Did they make any quad-track prints of CTHD? *ALL* of the CTHD prints I have handled were SRD only ones...

How and more curiously WHY does this guy have a print of this movie? ALL of the sellers' other auctions are for GOLF BALLS...

Things that make you go 'Hmmm'...

Aaron

 


Posted by Gordon Hedges III (Member # 863) on 05-16-2001, 12:44 AM:
 
Aaron, I agree with you. Our print of CTHD was also SRD only. And from the look at the seller's past auction items, they distribute golf equipment. When I play golf, I don't want to think about the theatre. Just to hit that little ball into a small hole.
 
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-16-2001, 01:27 AM:
 
Apparently, that guy trying to hustle that print is obviously was not the "smartest in the class". I think he lost a golf ball or two somewhere in the swamp.


 


Posted by Mike Judge (Member # 558) on 05-16-2001, 01:56 AM:
 
Yep, it was SRD only, any idea on how illegal this really is?
 
Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 05-16-2001, 02:08 AM:
 
About 1980 I was offered $10,000 CASH for one of my prints. Cannot disclose the title but it was a blockbuster. It would have gone straight to the phillipines.

Naturally I declined, saying I was not in the business of bootleg exhibition.

In another incident, when all the prints of The Godfather had been run off and were sitting in the warehouse awaiting shipment to theatres, 12 were stolen. The producer was extremely upset, as one might well imagine, this was passed on to me later. I was contacted by a somewhat sleazy and flaky individual who offered me one of these prints for $2,000. I declined, again saying I would have no involvements with bootleg exhibition.
All this is a no-no. Acquiring a used print salvaged from the dump once the theatrical engagements are over, to be part of a private collection and only shown privately is another matter entirely, and that's OK.
 


Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-16-2001, 04:26 AM:
 
What's even more incredible is that this is still up on eBay!

Run Joe...Run!

PS SRD only here in Oz also.

------------------
Children really brighten up your life...they never turn off lights.
 


Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-16-2001, 04:50 AM:
 
None were made in SDDS or DTS to my knowledge either. Gotta love those super idiots on Ebay. $4000 is a whole lot more than the print even cost to make in the first place! I think Mr.Valenti should just bid on it quietly and then email the fellow saying not to ship it that he will be in the area next week and to meet him somewhere to pick it up personally. That would be much more fun.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-16-2001, 11:52 AM:
 
I forwarded this listing to my contacts at the MPAA for investigation.

If anyone knows of a film piracy operation, the MPAA maintains a confidential "hotline":
http://www.mpaa.org/anti-piracy/contact/index.htm
http://www.mpaa.org/anti-piracy/index.htm

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
 


Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 05-16-2001, 02:52 PM:
 
would that 1980 blockbuster be a sequal to a 1977 blockbuster?
 
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 05-17-2001, 01:00 AM:
 
Aaron, that guy must have been zapped. It is no longer there...


 


Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 05-17-2001, 02:08 AM:
 
Ok, now that the page is gone, can someone tell me what "CTHD" stands for?

I hate it whem people abbreviate the names of movies like that.

Is it that hard to just write it out?

I mean if I mention "MR" does anyone know what I'm talking about?
 


Posted by Gordon Hedges III (Member # 863) on 05-17-2001, 02:10 AM:
 
I also tried to take a look at it again and sure enough... POOF!!! GONE!!!

It does piss me off when someone tries this kind of ! I was relieved to see it gone, but I really wanted to see just how much someone would pay for it. AND if the buyer has all the equipment to run it.


 


Posted by Gordon Hedges III (Member # 863) on 05-17-2001, 02:15 AM:
 
CTHD = CROUCHING TIGER HIDDEN DRAGON

MR ??? = Mary Reilly
Monster Ranch
Meg Ryan
??????????

Am I close?
 


Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-17-2001, 02:15 AM:
 
CHTD = Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

MR = Moulin Rogue
 


Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 05-17-2001, 02:21 AM:
 
Gordon and Brad you are both wrong.

It'll be fun to see how long it takes someone to figure this out.

I'll give you a hint.

1996.
 


Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-17-2001, 02:31 AM:
 
Oh, why didn't you say so? When someone uses an abbreviation, it is just assumed that it is from the current year. Since you're talking back in 1996, that would stand for Marvin's Room.



 


Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 05-17-2001, 02:33 AM:
 
how about

Maximum Risk
 


Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-17-2001, 02:36 AM:
 
Ah, I forgot about that one. Anyway, abbreviations like CTHD are commonly reserved only for super long movie titles anyway. Most people know what GWTW, FBDO, LOA and RHPS stand for due to the length of their title. I've actually never seen anyone abbreviate a movie shorter than 3 words before now.


 


Posted by Gordon Hedges III (Member # 863) on 05-17-2001, 02:43 AM:
 
MAXIMUM RISK?!?!?!

I should of known it would be one that I was glad to forget. But Brad is right, we tend to shorten long titles by the first letter of each word. Well, that is how I like to do it.

Who wants to talk about MR anyway?!?! Please, don't answer that.

Back to CTHD, maybe John's call to the MPAA did do something. I wonder if they did any gestapo tactics.
 


Posted by Manuel Francisco Valencia (Member # 710) on 05-17-2001, 02:47 AM:
 
For all you Ebay lovers out there, you might also want to try retailtko.com, they have some great deals on watches.


As far as "MR" goes I am stumped. How about another clue James?
 


Posted by Manuel Francisco Valencia (Member # 710) on 05-17-2001, 02:50 AM:
 
If I wouldn't have ran to the fridge for those few minutes I wouldn't be looking like an idiot now!
 
Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 05-17-2001, 02:57 AM:
 
well, that was quick.
Darryl guessed it right with MAXIMUM RISK.
I remember watching that film and I remember the best thing about it was PRODIGY'S "Firestarter" in the trailer, although that did put Firestarter in a bad light.

OK, Brad, I know Gone With The Wind, but FBDO, LOA, and RHPS, I'm having a hard time with.

But don't tell me. I want to try and figure these out for myself.

Hints please?

The only one I can think of is LOA = Lords Of Acid, and thats a band, not a movie.
 


Posted by Manuel Francisco Valencia (Member # 710) on 05-17-2001, 03:15 AM:
 
Brad

I was born in '81. Is this before my time?
 


Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 05-17-2001, 03:33 AM:
 
ooh ooh

LOA= Lawrence Of Arabia?
 


Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 05-17-2001, 10:43 AM:
 
Hey James here is a clue for the RHPS abreviation.

It was released to theaters in 1975.
 


Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 05-17-2001, 10:46 AM:
 
and here is a clue for the FBDO.

It was released in 1986.
 


Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-17-2001, 11:38 AM:
 
Darn, and I thought I had it with Marvin's Room!

How about TTTIHAU?
 


Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-17-2001, 12:11 PM:
 
One way to find what the acronyms are is to do a search of INTERNET websites and newsgroups with the acronym as the keyword.
For example, a search of "FBDO" quicky turned up "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" on a search with http://www.google.com . Likewise, almost 500 websites using "GWTW" were found. And "RHPS" ("Rocky Horror Picture Show") had over 15,000 "hits"!

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
 


Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-17-2001, 10:15 PM:
 
I don't have a problem with the abbreviations as long as it is written out at least once in the thread. Kinda' like the way my English teachers used to try to hammer into my thick skull.

However there are some abbrev. that are obvious. GWTW, for instance.
 


Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 05-17-2001, 10:52 PM:
 
Don't abbr.

I know you're expecting more, like

Don't use contractions.

Try not to ever split infinitives.

Here are some for you to figure out:

MTD

RHMIT

ANATR

BHSK

FWAAF


 


Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 05-19-2001, 02:22 AM:
 
oh, boy.
all these abbreviations are getting to me.
i dont even know where to start.
i think ill just give up now.
 
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-19-2001, 07:32 PM:
 


 


Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-25-2001, 03:57 AM:
 
Ooooh! Oooooh! I've got a good one for you...

E.T.


 


Posted by Rachel Carter (Member # 693) on 05-26-2001, 12:48 AM:
 
Darryl I know that one! One of my fav's.

Ferris Bueller's Day Off released in 1986

I was only 6 years old and my brother made me watch it at lease 20 times....my poor little mind...

 


Posted by Rachel Carter (Member # 693) on 05-26-2001, 12:50 AM:
 
and as for RHPS...

Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975)
 


Posted by Rachel Carter (Member # 693) on 05-26-2001, 12:53 AM:
 
heh, John beat me. As my page was updating I hadn't seen the he beat me to both of these answers....sorry

but I didn't cheat with searches....whats the fun in that?
 


Posted by Joe Grace (Member # 341) on 05-26-2001, 08:58 PM:
 
SW EP1
 
Posted by Rachel Carter (Member # 693) on 05-27-2001, 02:28 AM:
 
hmmmmm, I wonder....

uhhhh, no no thats not right...uhhhh....no no, NO CLUE!
 


Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 07-13-2001, 10:57 AM:
 
Here is the lastest Ebay SUCKER auction... Boy these people think they can pull the wool over us Film-Techers' eyes
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1255107183

Amazing! Even though it is modded to 6 channel and has a 222 SR/A in it, does it have to sell for more than a new CP65?

-Aaron

 


Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 07-13-2001, 11:14 AM:
 
Yeah, Aaron. I also wonder if it was a "Quick Disconnect" by some hooded individual in the middle of the night?
 
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-13-2001, 12:04 PM:
 
That hooded individual Is he the proprietor of "midnight theatre supply ?"
 
Posted by Paul Turner (Member # 832) on 07-13-2001, 02:17 PM:
 
A month ago I picked up the same processor, two stereo amps, monitor, exciter supply, and wall rack for WAY less than HALF the starting bid on this. Did i metnion i got it from someone i know and who will back it up if there's a problem? Nothing like and eBay user rating of 1 to inspire confidence.
 
Posted by Kara J. McVay (Member # 1285) on 06-19-2002, 11:44 AM:
 
I just called the MPAA, some new idiot is trying to sell a "Spiderman" print. Will they never learn.
 
Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 06-19-2002, 01:21 PM:
 
I checked that out.... your right the guy is nuts.

Since "trailers" are actually property of the distributors, your susposedly not allowed to sell them on Ebay.

There is a guy right now on Ebay who's taking bids on a #2 pencil "complete with eraser", and if you win the bid... he'll also throw in a FREE 35mm trailer of Men In Black II!!!
 


Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 06-19-2002, 02:25 PM:
 
There is someone selling film cells from Spiderman, Scooby Do and ATOC

And someone is selling frames from the 1st Spiderman Teaser (But it looks like they are claiming the frames are cut from a film print


 


Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 06-19-2002, 03:53 PM:
 
I think people selling "film cells" should be jailed or worse. Its bad enough trying to find trailors for some films without these jackasses chopping them up into 1000 useless pieces

Josh


 


Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-19-2002, 04:38 PM:
 
That's because they are assholes, Josh.
 
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 06-19-2002, 04:58 PM:
 
I disagree. What if a trailer is damaged or destroyed by a projector, (or more correctly, an uncareful person operating a projector) but a few "cool" cells are salvageable for "collector's sake"?

I've spent a break or two cutting cells from messed-up trailers I found in the trash. Not to sell, though. I put them in those little binder pages for slides that the NCN people left behind.

Now I know that most of these e-bay people aren't taking their frames from damaged trailers, but I'm sure all people who possess "film cells" are not assholes...

=TMP=


 


Posted by Adam Wilbert (Member # 1184) on 06-19-2002, 08:57 PM:
 
I have several slides that i made from trailer cells. Two frames fit perfectly inside a 35mm snap-together slide. Then you can put them into a carosel and watch the movie really really slowly. These were from trailers about to be pitched into the garbage.

-adam

 


Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-20-2002, 12:00 AM:
 
Yeah - but selling it on Ebay is being kind of sleazy. Some people will do anything to make a quick buck!

Sorry, Thomas. I stick to my earlier post on this one.



 


Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-20-2002, 12:07 AM:
 
Actually the most pathetic part of it all are the morons who are buying these "film cells"! What use is it? What good is it? Does it really have any value? NO! Stupid, stupid, stupid.

This reminds me of the fellow who cut out "posters" from the movies section of the newspaper for something like 30 years and then tried to sell his collection. He wanted something ridiculous like half a million dollars...for newsprint mini "posters"!


 


Posted by Mitchell Cope (Member # 32) on 06-20-2002, 12:40 PM:
 
While I in no way have ever been associated with auctioning, selling or buying film cells, I can see why a movie fan might want to buy one with their favorite actor or from a film they liked a lot. It might make them feel like they own some sort of unique collectible, even if only for personal reasons. Even Fox/Paramount marketed cells from "Titanic" in stores like Best Buy and Wal-Mart. One person's trash is another person's treasure.

Like Brad, I remember someone trying to sell on eBay a notebook of film strips from about ten different trailers. I think they wanted like $300 for it. I don't think they had a clue how worthless those strips were.
 


Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 06-20-2002, 06:22 PM:
 
Or the DVD release of 2001 had a cell enclosed
 
Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 06-20-2002, 06:27 PM:
 
About film prints for sale on ebay.

lets take Spiderman as the example.

Its currently selling for £333 (500US)

Does the seller not relalise that the print is worth much much more
-like £15000
 


Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 06-20-2002, 10:03 PM:
 
Apropos film clips in scrapbooks, back in the 1960's I drove out
to New Jersey at the invitation of a young couple trying to sell
the stuff their late father had accumulated in his lifetime career as projectionist. They had about 100 projector manuals with parts catalogs,(Each in a carefully labeled manila envelope) an E-7 head, a personal projectioists "bible" he had typed single spaced about an inch thick, and a scrapbook of film clips of all the noteworthy films and different film formats he had ever run. There were odd widths, like 63mm, and film with round sprocket holes, hand-colored frames,
and others I had never seen before. Now that was a wonderful piece, but I was short of funds and space, and suggested they keep the two original books as family heirlooms. About a month later they told me they sold the whole lot for $300.

I watched a reconstruction of Sergei Eisenstein's "Bezhin Meadow" made
from the four-frame film clips of each shot he kept in a scrapbook
as an editing aid. Since the film was destroyed with no other materials extant, these clips enabled the construction of a still-frame version with music and narration added. A valuable addition to film history, and an understanding of the director's art and ideas.
 
Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 06-21-2002, 06:40 AM:
 
Michael

The cost of a standard 35mm release print is no where near £15000 ($22000 US) more like a tenth of that .

For £15K you could "buy" a 45 minute 2D Imax print though
 


Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-21-2002, 10:00 AM:
 
At ShoWest, the Kodak Digital Cinema presentation mentioned that it costs a distributor about $350 per week to supply a 35mm print to a theatre. For theatres showing five shows per day, that means the print cost is only about $10 per show.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
 


Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 06-21-2002, 10:15 AM:
 
When I bought all of the contents of the projection booth of the Woodzo Drive-In Theatre, I found a box of "goodies" the original full-time projectionist left. It was full of hand-written letters from the owner (in New York) to him (in Newport).. most of them postmarked in the late 60's and early 70's, small notebooks - detailing every film he ever showed at the theatre, how many reels it had, who was the distributors, and when he showed them. I also found in the bottom of the box, a small manilla envelope of his "personal collection" of individual cells he clipped from the movies he showed. Most of the cells were from "porno films", showing only the scenes he either "personally liked" or was not allowed to show, and other cells featuring women in various stages of nudity and un-dress. I would assume, by looking through the calendars of films, it was the former not the latter.

When we pulled the lens cabinet from the wall, we found a hole in the concrete block wall stuffed full of Playboy Magazines from the 60's & 70's.

I have no idea what to do with this stuff, but there's no way I'm gonna part with it.

------------------
Barry Floyd
Floyd Entertainment Group
Nashville, Tennessee
(Drive-In Theatre - Start-Up)
 


Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 06-21-2002, 01:25 PM:
 
Paul-- I will agree with you there. As I said, most of them probably did hack up a perfectly good trailer and are rightfully so assholes.

On a side note, what about selling full trailers? I see most trailer auctions end at $1.00 with no bids. This could be a good opportunity for indies or sub-runs to get trailers at a little more than shipping cost. It would be cool if someone started a trailer "re-use/recycle" service, if there weren't copyright or legal issues with the studios.

=TMP=
 


Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 06-21-2002, 07:15 PM:
 
It is my understanding that selling tralers on E-Bay or anywhere else is illegal.
Even if it wasn't, indies and sub-runs shouldn't have to got hunting them down on some internet auction.
And since many trailers these days come with dates on them, the studios should make trailers for the sub-runs with a generic coming soon on them.
But we know that won't happen.
 
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-21-2002, 10:09 PM:
 
Selling trailers is kind of a grey area. On one hand, they are considered to be the property of the distributor; on the other hand, distributors almost never ask for them to be returned (with 20th Century Fox being a notable exception).

My personal feeling is that as long as a) the studio never asked for the trailer to be returned (i.e. the trailers are considered to be "abandoned property") and b) the film is available on videotape/DVD (i.e. it is "licensed for home viewing"), I don't have any moral or ethical issues with selling or purchasing trailers. Whether this is actually legal or not is another question, but no one seems to be making a big deal about the secondary market for movie posters, which are generally handled in the same way by the studios.

In general, donating old trailers to a second-run house seems to be the best approach, since it helps both the studio and the second-run theatre and it doesn't require the first-run theatre to pay shipping charges to return the trailers to the distributor. Ideally, the studios themselves would become involved in "trailer recycling," but we all know that this doesn't happen in most cases.

Obviously, if the studio specifically asks for trailers/posters/etc. to be returned, theatres should comply with the request.

And, yes, anyone who offers a complete print of a current film (or even trailers or posters of a current film)--which almost certainly is either stolen or nonexistant--in a public forum like Ebay is a complete idiot.


 


Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 06-22-2002, 07:53 AM:
 
quote:
Michael
The cost of a standard 35mm release print is no where near £15000 ($22000 US) more like a tenth of that .

For £15K you could "buy" a 45 minute 2D Imax print though


hmmmm Someone told me before the rough figure 10 to 15k for a 35mm print. So it's more like 1 or 1.5 thousands pounds??


 


Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 06-22-2002, 12:20 PM:
 
There was a point in time where almost every trailer sent to the theater came with one of those prepaid UPS return labels which I gladly filled out and packed up our "expired" trailers every week to be sent out. Then, they stopped coming! (except from Fox) The trailers began to pile up and were eventually all thrown away. (along with the stack of DTS discs that someone "forgot" to put back in the can!! )

To me, this indicated that the studio didn't care if they got the trailers back or not, since they made no effort in conveying this message (no return labels, no notices included, etc.) and as Scott stated, "abandoned property."

So if the film's initial release date has passed, and the studio/distributor/depot abandoned the property, IMHO the studio shouldn't really have any scrouples with someone selling a month-old trailer for next to nothing. If it should fall into the hands of some Joe Blow from Idaho, he will most likely have no way of projecting or copying it. If it ends up in the hands of an indie or sub-run operator, then the studio gets free advertizing for their film with no shipping costs to them. Either are better than seeing how many trailers it takes to fill a dumpster.

I guess the general rule would be the fact that the film's release date has passed. Anyone selling "Men In Black II" or "XXX" trailers right now should be severely beaten about the face and neck.

=TMP=
 


Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 10-31-2002, 11:51 AM:
 
Bumping this up for the latest in Ebay idiocy!
here

And it has BIDDERS!

Be Afraid... Be VERY afraid...

-Aaron

 


Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 10-31-2002, 12:39 PM:
 
What the hell? It's up to $21 now!! I guess we've found a new way for underpaid projectionists to make some money on the side. Sell reels that "actually held a movie"

Things like this pop up from time to time. A while back, someone was selling film cans. Nasty, dirty, banged up cans for $15 each which "may have shipped movies like Casablanca, Gone with the Wind and Titanic." *sigh*

And then there are the people selling film frames (or "cells") for hundreds of dollars, hacked "from an actual print of the movie"

=TMP=
 


Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 10-31-2002, 12:40 PM:
 
Aaron,

I have like 60 of those "Slit Reels" in my theatre. At $5.95 I could get $357, wow! You don't think Technicolor would mind if I sent back all my prints without cores or reel flanges, do you?

Wow! At $21 I could make $1,260. I think I am going to join E-Bay and bid this pig to the moon.


 


Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 10-31-2002, 12:45 PM:
 
I guess there is a sucker born every second - instead of every minute....
 
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 10-31-2002, 01:39 PM:
 
I'm donating a couple reels and a Goldberg case to Cowboy Pictures. I received "Seven Samurai" (10 reels) from Toronto in 2 4-reel cases (reels) and 1 box (R9 & R10 on cores & plastic tins). Since I have a few extras I'm going to swap them 2 3-reelers for 1 4-reeler and give them a couple reels so it can go out as 4+3+3. I have a feeling that the Toronto festival's inspection & prep people got it all on cores and accidentally gave away the reels and cases. So I might as well make it complete. And I get to keep the cool Japanese plastic tins with central hubs. (See pix in other thread.)
 
Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 10-31-2002, 07:00 PM:
 
I note that "Gotreel" whose plastic Technicolor reel was fetching $21
when posted, has a great many 16mm and a few 35mm metal and plastic reels and cans in very good condition--some look new--at very reasonable starting prices. Yet most had received no bids. Perhaps he's disposing of stock rendered surplus by the near demise of 16mm film screenings in the home, schools, churches (he's offering Sunday School films as well), industry and business. Already perfectly good used 16mm sound projectors have almost no resale value and are given away or chucked in dumpsters. (A friend gave me a classic USN Ampro and a B&H that people gave to him, gratis.)

There's a nostalgia market for recycled reels, making them into clock faces, and the big 6,000' SS reels into cocktail table tops.

So the two bidders willing to pay $$ for a crappy TES reel are out of
their minds, not the seller, IMHO.


 


Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 10-31-2002, 07:31 PM:
 
There's someone in eBay-land who is selling a rusted Goldberg shipping reel (see it here) for an incredible $9.95 starting bid (or Buy It Now, 15 bucks! Wow! ). He couldn't sell it before, so he relisted it at the same price. I'm glad it's only the seller that is wasting his money on this reel (on eBay listing fees), and not ignorant buyers suckered by the magic term "split reel".

I coudn't sell the same reel for a buck, and deservedly so!



 


Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 10-31-2002, 07:41 PM:
 
Duplicate post. Mea culpa!


 


Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-11-2003, 05:29 AM:
 
Another eBay idiot can be found here. I tried to e-mail eBay to tell them that this person was offering nitrate for sale without understanding the health and safety issues (for example, if he posts it in the UK without telling the Royal Mail what it is, he could be criminally liable if it ignites in transit). The contact page on their website won't let you do so unless you register with them. I don't want to do that and subject myself to yet more spam. I tried emailing webmaster@ebay.co.uk but that bounced. Does anyone have an email address for them that works?
 
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 09-26-2003, 01:23 AM:
 
I don't know if this classifies as an "idiot," but probably:

1933 FDR POLITICAL CAMPAIGN TRAILER 35MM

Text from the description: (I added the boldness [Wink] )

Rare 1933 political campaign trailer for Franklin D. Roosevelt with Dick Powell singing "Happy Days are Here Again". This is not a copy, but the original 35mm NITRATE trailer from 1933. The film starts with: 1930, 1931, 1932- Out of the years of hopeless Depression there came a great leader to take his people and his country into the sunshine of recovery. Happy Days are Here Again is his ideal and his goal. It is to be the hourly and daily song of a contented and happy people. Franklin D. Roosevelt, statesman and builder. His promises have become realities. He is making the idle man of the street the man of action. Now, he asks you to give your hand in helpfulness. The responsibility is yours. Now more than ever you must help and follow. (Footage of Dick Powell singing "Happy Days are Here Again"). The inspired leadership of President Roosevelt (closes with photo of FDR and American flag). This trailer runs approximately 4 minutes. It's in very good condition, has 16 splices, and some very minor sprocket damage. Mounted on a plastic core. Very rare, 35mm B&W nitrate.
---

Hmmm... 4 splices a minute! Very good condition indeed. [Razz]

=TMP=
 
Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 09-26-2003, 02:13 AM:
 
Since nitrate is a dangerous combustable substance the big question is how are they going to ship it cheaply.
 
Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 09-26-2003, 07:29 AM:
 
It may be sent FedEx Ground, among others. It's a category 4.1 flammable material. Forms must be filled out and the package carrying appropriate labels. (See the FedEx rule book.)

Or you can just ship it and figure the odds are that it lasted this long it will go for a couple more days.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-26-2003, 08:29 AM:
 
Here's the Kodak information about handling and shipping nitrate film:

http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en/motion/hse/H-182.pdf
 
Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 10-06-2003, 09:22 AM:
 
Quick!!! Somebody bid.

Item number: 3353097201
Link to item

Trailer cores with film on them! Only $10.00.
Seller will remove the film for an additional fee.

If somebody bids on this, I think I am going to be rich...
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-06-2003, 01:03 PM:
 
That listing is either tongue-in-cheek, or an ill-advised unauthorized sale of the trailers.
 
Posted by Sam Hunter (Member # 1119) on 10-06-2003, 01:32 PM:
 
Mike,
It seems that the seller may be trying to get around the banning of 35mm items by wording his auctions like he is doing.
Just a thought.
 
Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 10-06-2003, 03:46 PM:
 


[ 10-06-2003, 06:44 PM: Message edited by: Michael Gonzalez ]
 
Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 10-06-2003, 03:54 PM:
 
I just love how auctions like this are usually worded. I think that I am going to post my own auction:

GENUINE USED MOVIE THEATER SPLICING TAPE

This tape could have been used to hold together the following films:

The Matrix
LOTR: The Two Towers
Gigli
Gone With The Wind
The Lion King

*Extra charge for Zebra Tape [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Nicholas Roznovsky (Member # 861) on 10-06-2003, 04:32 PM:
 
Hey, that guy is willing to "remove the film from the cores for an addtional charge"! That's true customer service! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 10-06-2003, 11:28 PM:
 
quote:
That listing is either tongue-in-cheek, or an ill-advised unauthorized sale of the trailers.
What does Tounge in cheek mean??
 
Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 10-06-2003, 11:59 PM:
 
======

Main Entry: tongue-in-cheek
Function: adjective
Date: 1933
: characterized by insincerity, irony, or whimsical exaggeration

======

thus sayeth Merriam-Webster.
 
Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 10-07-2003, 06:30 AM:
 
delete, please... [Mad]
 
Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 10-07-2003, 06:34 AM:
 
quote:
That listing is either tongue-in-cheek, or an ill-advised unauthorized sale of the trailers.
I've got a hunch I know who this guy is.

I'd bet on the latter.

Michael... your ad should include something like:
"Tape comes with film attached (for demonstration purposes... please select title below), but I can remove the film from the tape for an addtional charge."
[Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 10-09-2003, 11:51 PM:
 
Now you know why I would rather destroy my previews after use rather than to give them away.

Lately if I break down a show, I'll leave the previews attached if there is room for them on the reel. If not, I'll stuff them in film cans as buffers if there is room for that, too.

I am overwhelmed with hundreds of obsolete previews. Seems as though previews multiply like flies.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-10-2003, 07:32 AM:
 
Returning used trailers as "stuffers" in the film case is fine. Just protect the trailers by winding them well on a core, and enclosing them in a plastic bag for protection from dirt. (I've often thought using a vacuum "seal-a-meal" bag would be a great way to keep the roll tight and clean):

http://www.rivco.com/support_files/sealameal.asp

Kodak packages large rolls of print film raw stock in vacuum sealed foil bags with great success.

Labeling the used trailer with the title and format will help the exchange recycle it to other theatres that may need it.
 
Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 10-10-2003, 11:05 AM:
 
That wouldn't work here in the UK trailer distribution is not handled by the distributors, apart from those distributors that do handle their own trailers, there are two companies, and you have (or did last time I worked in a booth) to return the trailers to them, in one case I seem to remember it was done by post, not film transport, which was a pain in the ass.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-10-2003, 11:20 AM:
 
Yes. If the trailer distributor provides a specified return method (e.g., prepaid packaging), it should be used. But in the USA, I know that TES (Brad Carroll) was definitely trying to recycle used trailers to theatres that need them. If anything, returning the trailers to the film exchange will help assure they end up being recycled into new film base rather than going into a landfill:

FPC Film Salvage

Kodak Recycling

Recycling
 
Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 10-10-2003, 04:29 PM:
 
quote:
Returning used trailers as "stuffers" in the film case is fine. Just protect the trailers by winding them well on a core, and enclosing them in a plastic bag for protection from dirt.
Just like the studios send them to us, eh?

Sorry, John... your idea is valid. It just gripes me how much dirt seems to accumulate on its way from the lab to us. I might not have to use so much of Brad's products if they were as careful. [Frown]
 
Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 10-10-2003, 09:47 PM:
 
I Wish technicolor would use plastic bags instead of those stupid paper bands.

No, wait, I take that back. I wish TES would go out of business.
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2