Tonight I viewed our 3 x 400 version of the Dirty Dozen, being an MGM I seriously expected this to have faded all together, the images i take always seem to show a whole lot more red then what is on screen so these are not very good. This is a very good cut down of very well know war movie, the quality of the image and sound are good, (typical MGM where the image is not quite pin sharp), this print is in very good shape with no lines and it has been in my collection for at least 20 years and is mounted onto one Elmo 1200ft spool.
This film is weird in that whites are still pure white, black hair is still black, grey hair is grey and skin tones are about right, however, there is a sift to brown rather than red so i assume this to be Kodak stock, if it was Eastman it would be red by now. What i like about this edit is that it does contain the parts that the TV version dont seem to want to show, especially with Telly Savalas in one of his best roles. I will keep this for bit longer but unfortunately i am moving on our fading/faded items now as this is not the way to view a movie. I think we can take it that MGM's, along with with most 70s colour prints are coming to the end of there useful lives unless they are on Agfa or Fuji stock and while we can pick up outstanding 16mm colour prints for a fraction of the 80s super 8 films we would like then this is where i am most likely heading to. Seeing what was a fantastic print come to this makes me a bit dissapointed. Would certainly love a Derann reprint on the later stocks of this title.

Looks good Tom. Are you able to learn what stock it is on. Kodak SP goes a nice golden brown, much better than Eastman.

I have the full length print of this Tom and it is about the same now I'd say regarding fade.
It's a great story though and highly enjoyable still.

I hate Eastman stock with a passion, that company has ripped off every cine collector with there trashy stocks.

I guess they figured we'd be long gone by now, just like their stock!

Thats true. ass wipes!!
I assume the later re-prints from Derann would have been on LPP

I wouldn't know sorry Tom. I've never ever seen one, not even advertised.

It fulfilled the Airline companies wishes if nothing else!
They loved the cut priced film stock.
It only needed to last 6 months for them to be happy.
They were the pioneers of the disposable and throw away society of today.

I couldn't afford to buy colour films, not that there was a lot that appealed to me. Collectors bought these expensive films, believing they had them forever, Kodak knew different. The problem with Eastman had been known since the 1950s not many years after it was introduced.

Looks far better than the print I had Tom, still good colour, mine had gone red

Yes, my own is very much like Tom's, the outdoor daytime scenes still clearly display green in the grass and blue in the sky but indoor scenes are now very muted for colour.

Tom is also right though in that what you see on screen doesn't appear nearly half as red as the perceived colour after posting screenshots captured by a digital camera left in everyday ordinary settings as I do.

I realized this after posting shots from the persuaders etc, where of course they have faded and shifted towards red and pink hues, but to nothing like the extent they appear on here, when viewed on screen with the naked eye.

Like I said, despite its fade, the Dirty Dozen is to me, still a very enjoyable film to watch on Super 8mm with an excellent storyline.

(#8) Agree, Robert, and the reason I now only buy black and white prints, particularly with fade so pervasive on color prints at this point.

Not beyond anything printed after 84 John, as previously said and as you know now all so perfectly well.
There are many thousands if not tens of thousands of example images here to prove this now.

It isn't all doom and gloom John.

No one said anything about gloom and doom — in fact, I think these are the best years to be in our hobby, particularly with a whole host of screening technologies. I just leave color to other, more consistent, technologies, that’s all. Nothing wrong with that.

But glorious spectacularly rich colour film prints do still very much exist.
Anybody reading your continued comments surrounding your reasons for only choosing black and white prints as being fit for purpose now in this era, would get a very different impression altogether John.

Where I am in complete agreement with you, is regarding the fact that these still ARE some of the best years to still be dabbling in this hobby, but my reasons for agreeing with you on this are completely different ones than your own seemingly.

I'm probably the only person here happy to watch red prints; of course, they were red when I bought them so that probably makes a difference. I get just as much pleasure out of them.

You are not alone Robert, many still prefer a red print to look at than an artificial pixilated one.
My views lie somewhere in between dependent on other factors also, like overall condition of print besides just the extent of fade in question.

At least you are of the mindset to promote colour film Robert on a film forum, not just repeatedly give off an impression that colour film now is pointless medium to collect any longer.

What's all that about mores the point, on a bloody film forum full of real film enthusiasts supposedly???

It's like having David Hardy back here all over again!!

If we opened an anti film forum and invited characters like these onto it, it couldn't look and sound any the worse at times!

Pointless!!

I’m not sure why my preference to purchase black and white prints elicits such an unwarranted diatribe from you, Andrew? It is these harangues and diatribes that prevented me and others from joining this forum in the first place. If you can’t discuss these things in a mature manner, then it might be best to step away from the keyboard for the benefit of the forum.

Your not-so-subtle digs at me and my posts, and calling into question my motivations as it relates to film really has to stop, Andrew. We are all adults here —

You're right then John....NOT!

Have a read of nigh on all of David's posts here and still over on film tech.
You'd simply never believe he is a film lover supposedly or an ex cinema protectionist. He does nothing but slate real film and continually waxes lyical of the benefits of switching to digital.

As said, pointless!

Barry Littlechild,...Eat your heart out,.. God Bless his soul.

Another who commented in film magazines as a film loving promoter and connoisseur, and yet the minute he discovered the early crude, and quite frankly diabolical early LCD home cinema projectors,
couldn't wait to begin calling film fit to burn once he could watch a movie on a large screen for £10 or less!!

Pointless!!

I've said this before in private, but I don't think I've said this in a forum. I think the problem with red prints is when you have bought a film that was perfect, then you haven't watched it for a long time, get it out and discover is turned red. It's like it doesn't exist anymore. You have lost a film. I've had the same thing happen to me; I was sent many years ago a digest of Lawrence of Arabia, and it was perfect. I never watched it for years, then one day got it out to check and found it was completely red. I haven't projected it. I also have a few L&H silents, which unknown to me at the time were on colour stock.
When you buy an already faded print, you knew it had full colour at one time, but you never saw it like that. I remember once, I think it was in the other forum that you said if we can watch films in B&W, then why not red & white. There used to be a lot of colour films that were only available in B&W versions, but we still enjoyed them; we never worried about what we were missing.

Thats a very good way of putting it there Robert.
My first experience with a film turning red was a number of years ago now, the film was the 400ft Version of the French Connection. An excellent and well edited film. The print was purchased new for 29.95 when i was still at school by my Brother & that was a fortune back then. The image was excellent with very good pin sharp image and vibrant colours for the day.
Move forward a number of years and we went to view it after many years of not showing it and it hadn't just turned off colour, it was red., i mean almost beetroot red. To say we were bemused was an understatement. Until this film turned we hadn't even heard of this, (im going back around 20 years here. My Brother was so annoyed at this he did throw it in the bin. We didn't know any better back then but i have to say, it was, As Robert said, like loosing the film you bought.
This title i have reviewed here was bought for me as a present from my Brother many many years ago, when first viewed and for several years after it was a stunning MGM print with blue sky and deep green grass. As it happens, (and as said), these digital camera images are very poor, if the colours looked like this on screen it would be up for sale now, but there are still good greens in the day time scenes and the night scenes are more grey than brown as you see them here, in fact the night scenes are thankfully pretty good still, however, as this is how it stands now it will be sold off at some point in the future, probably after another viewing later in the year or next year.

My Brother always tells me, this is why he prefers to buy b/w prints of the war and westerns he loves. I myself will now try, (try that is ) to stick with only purchasing a few more choice titles in colour as i have with my 16mm.

It wasn't until 1981 that the subject of fading came up in Movie Maker. I was unaware of it, though those in the industry knew of it. I have films where there is still a decent amount of colour, and when you take a screenshot it comes out red or purple. £29 was a lot of money back then; I remember a B&W equivalent was £16 and that seemed expensive. What was interesting was that Hugh bought some Standard 8 prints that had been part of Derann's hire library, and they were on reversal stock, so the colour is as good as it was when they were made.

Those colour Standard 8 prints were fantastic, the one we had that had to be sold due to poor sound was the full feature of Great Day in the Morning.
The image was fantastic and had an IB Tech look to it. Really vivid colours and it was a full feature from Roger Lilly's library here in Plymouth.

Colour film as we all are fully and perfectly aware of, is absolutely fine still folks, .. you simply have to choose wisely now and pay accordingly as a consequence now!

With this in mind, enjoy your Super 8mm and 16mm Blockbuster Titles everyone in amazing LPP or Ib Tech or Agfa Colour for many many years to come yet!!

If you don't wanna pay, enjoy your DVD, VHS, Betamax, Laserdiscs, Blu Ray,BD Ultra and any other such likes format.
It's all there is without analogue and real actual fabric and the electro mechechanical magic boxes that comes with it!

Take your pick, enjoy your choice, don't interfere with those who love real film on a film forum please !!!


Boo Hoo,.. why does a 12" vinyl record now cost £22 from HMV instead of a fiver when I once bought it in the early 80's already for £5. I can get the CD used off amazon for 79 p delivered!! Arghhhhh!!!!!

I'm a nobody,...Get Me Out Of Here!!!!!

With 16mm there is not always a choice because many prints will have been destroyed. Every time I see a copy of the 1971 version of Kidnapped, it's always been on Eastman stock and this does turn up fairly frequently. Myself, as you know are not bothered by the colour, the title is more important.

I think the average price of Vinyl in Sainsbury's is £15. I sold a lot of Vinyl off last year, though still have a lot. Looks like I need a new Hi Fi system as the optical reader looks to be gone. If it can be repaired, it's likely to cost as much as I could get a new one for. Progress: i can still get out my stereo from 1971 with no problems.

(#23) Exactly my point as to why this is the best time to be in our hobby given all of the screening options we now have available to us, be it film and other formats — enjoy it all I say! 😀 Life is too short to be spent worrying and getting wound up about what David, Fred, Barney, etc., are saying over at the “other” forum. We all enjoy the hobby in our own way, and not by some prescribed dictate of what it should be. Not sure what’s wrong with that, as it’s the beauty of our (or any) hobby.

Happy Saturday, everyone!