Bad experiences with Pro8mm

[RichardWilks]

Hello,

I am a filmmaker of Super-8mm short films, from the UK, and I'd like to share a few experiences that I've had with Pro8mm.

My first encounter with Pro8mm was in 2010 after winning a jury prize at a festival here in England in 2009. The prize was 4 films from Pro8mm, with developing and HD scanning included. These films, once shot and sent to them, were destroyed by their developing tanks, during a power cut. I had paid $50 in push process fees, as well as almost $150 in postage costs (due to their insistence on using Fedex, despite there being a USPS post office 100 metres from their office). The shooting of these rolls however, cost me an awful lot more.

But never mind, power cuts happen. They sent me two replacement rolls, with developing and scanning included, as a way of saying sorry. This didn't come close to making up for what I'd lost, but it serves me right for failing to shoot some backup footage.

My second encounter with Pro8mm was earlier this year, after winning another Jury prize with the same festival in 2011. On this occasion, I was awarded HD scanning time on their Millenium II scanner. I had to pay $50 in prep and cleaning fees, but that seems reasonable when one considers that the scanning time would have cost over $500. Anyway, in order to avoid the expensive Fedex service, I planned to email Pro8mm a pre-paid USPS label. Apparently the 3 minute walk to the post office was still too much to ask.

However, once the work was completed, I was told I needed to provide them with packaging materials. I didn't think to include an empty jiffy bag with the reels, naturally thinking that they (as you'd expect of any reputable business) wouldn't struggle in providing me with one. Not the case. They flatly refused, and insisted that I send them an empty jiffy bag, all the way from England. Apparently California is currently in the depths of jiffy bag drought.

When I finally got the footage back, I discovered very quickly that it had been scanned out of focus. To be certain that it was the scan and not the footage that was out, I had it re-scanned by a lab here in Bristol that has an MWA Flashscan HD. As I'm sure you know, these are not the best telecine machines by a long way, but the footage is markedly sharper than the Pro8mm scan, and immediately confirmed to me that Pro8mm had made a serious error.

Naturally I informed them. I sent them stills from the footage, along with stills from the MWA scan that clearly illustrated their mistake. This was their response:

'If you are unhappy with the transfer we are happy to re-do it.'

They informed me that I would have to pay for the postage to have the reels sent back to them, the postage to have the reels and scan sent back to me, and the prep and cleaning, all over again. Another $150. And despite their clear and obvious error, they refused to apologise or even acknowledge that any error had been made. Below is a link to an account on Flickr, onto which I have uploaded the exact same comparison stills that I sent them. They are taken directly from the 10-bit uncompressed files and are not manipulated in any way.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/82784534@N ... otostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/82784534@N ... otostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/82784534@N ... otostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/82784534@N ... otostream/

As you can see, the scan is badly out of focus from the far left of the image to the near right. The far right of the image is perfect. I don't know enough about Super-8mm scan gates but is it possible that the left hand side of the film was not seated in the gate properly? Pro8mm certainly aren't willing to entertain discussion on this, but perhaps someone reading this knows something.

Pro8mm tried to tell me that because I had chosen a one-light transfer, focus throughout the footage cannot be guaranteed. I tried explaining to them that the footage is out of focus from the beginning to the end, and all the way in between, but they've stopped responding to my emails (which have always been courteous).

This job, had I paid for it in full, would have cost over $600. Am I really supposed to believe that they are willing to offer a service that costs so much but can guarantee absolutely nothing? Why on earth would they even offer a one-light scan if they can't guarantee that it will be in focus? What use to anyone is an out of focus scan? One-light transfers are not adjusted for changes in exposure and colour temperature, and are thusly a risk if one's footage is badly exposed and / or poorly colour balanced. Scan focus has got nothing to do with it.

In 2010 Pro8mm destroyed my film in their developing tanks. This year, they've given me a scan that is completely unusable, and have offered me nothing for my wasted time and money, other than the opportunity to waste even more. Thankfully, I only invested $150 in this entirely fruitless exercise; the MWA scan, by the way, cost me $20.

I'm not a bitter person (really!), but this company have annoyed me so much that I feel compelled to write this post. It will be entered onto various forums, not just this one, so apologies if you see it twice.

[MitchPerkins]

Hello,

I am a filmmaker of Super-8mm short films, from the UK, and I'd like to share a few experiences that I've had with Pro8mm.

HI Richard,

Whoo boy! This has been going on for years, lots of posts here on the topic in the past. I have been ambivalent, given the differing experiences related, but this has convinced me once and for all that these people are absolute total morons who should be out of business yesterday. Post it to every forum you can find, I say...

My sympathies to you, also....

Mitch

[RichardWilks]

Thanks Mitch. It's a shame, because they have a really good scanner! But a scanner operated by monkeys is no use to anyone.

[wado1942]

I saw Pro8mm's demo video a few years ago, which one expects to have their best work on it and that alone convinced me not to use them for transfers. I've only worked with Pro8mm once and that was solely to purchase Vision2 100T with processing for a music video. Aside from getting slightly shorted on the "50ft" load, I had no issue. I have only used CinePost for scanning on paid jobs. I used Debenham on a couple of things, but they were just OK. I know a few guys who used Flying Spot, but said their stuff was ridiculously over-saturated and expensive.

[aj]

Why do people from UK or EU bother with a lab with such a bad reputation and such prices?

Even when free it is still a bad choice

There are Super-8 labs in the UK itself and on the EU continent there several others and there is Andec which does most S8 processing using professinal machine and with several runs per week.

[kII]

Although I cannot comment on Pro8's services, i can say that Andec to are prone to 'screwing film' aswell. I've experianced 3 lots of bad processing within 18 months. The last batch they screwed was the last straw for me, now all my super 8 goes to the USA for processing.

[Andersens Tears]

I only ever used them once and that was back in 2003 when they had a London office. I purchased a 10 minute film/processing and transfer service - which when processed and transfered was 8 minutes and 45 seconds and the filmstock was all jittery as hell - very expensive and very poor - so I never used them again.

However I think the fact the they are around to promote the FORMAT so much is a good thing.

[Andersens Tears]

Although I cannot comment on Pro8's services, i can say that Andec to are prone to 'screwing film' aswell. I've experianced 3 lots of bad processing within 18 months. The last batch they screwed was the last straw for me, now all my super 8 goes to the USA for processing.

There are plenty of other labs and individuals in the UK and Europe who do a sterling job, so if you are in the UK or Europe it is unecessary to send your films all the way to the US for processing.

Agreed this is mostly for reversal and I awlays use Andec for my negative processing.

[MrJ]

I was editor on a film that used the Pro8mm lab a few years back...the footage was scanned very soft and really unsatisfactory. Time restraints prevented any follow up at the time but i wouldn't recommend them to anyone.

[CHAS]

I would highly recommend using Spectra instead of Pro8mm. Spectra was started by two fed-up employees of Pro8mm that wanted to give people good customer service and no excuses. I've only used them for one project but they were a pleasure to work with and did, IMHO, a great job.

Another company is Yale. The funny thing is, all three of these companies are within about 3 miles of each other. Yale screwed up a roll of Tri-X and were so apologetic about it that they did a scene-for-scene telecine on it (with me supervising) for all of the other footage I shot -- even stuff they hadn't processed ( a few rolls of K40). They may have fucked up one roll but they did good by a.) admitting their mistake and b.) going above and beyond to rectify it.

See if Pro8mm would do something like that. Not in a million years.

[Angus]

I have never used PRO8 but I remember when they had a London office I heard lots of bad things about them. Not universally bad, I remember Jake at the Widescreen Centre in London used to deal with them and had favourable words...but enough bad reports that it put me off trying the negative film they were selling before Kodak got into officially marketing Vision stocks in super 8.

A word on Andec. I haven't used them for a couple of years but I never had anything but great service from Andec. The one time they did mess up their machinery broke and ruined a whole run if super 8 tri-x of which one roll was mine. They sent me the developed film of which about half was OK to use...and a replacement cartridge with free processing and postage included.

With regard to PRO8 and postage, I believe the laws in that neck of the woods don't require postage to/from to be paid when they are at fault and have to offer a rescan. In many mother parts of the world, like the whole EU, we take such things for granted. If the lab screws up *they* pay the postage to/from.

[Will2]

With regard to PRO8 and postage, I believe the laws in that neck of the woods don't require postage to/from to be paid when they are at fault and have to offer a rescan. In many mother parts of the world, like the whole EU, we take such things for granted. If the lab screws up *they* pay the postage to/from.

In the U.S. we just rely on the word getting out like it is here not to do business with them vs. legislating the market place. I understand both points of view on that.

The guys at Pro8mm are jaded. They've been doing Super 8 since the early 70's with Super8Sound in Boston I think. Like most pro telecine houses, they have dealt with a ton of people wanting something for nothing and students that don't pay their bills.

Instead of realizing that is part of the business and keep a positive attitude, the impression I get is of a mean old man that wants to keep the kids off the yard. I like the business model, just wish the quality of telecine was better and customer service was even reasonable. They have a big hole to dig themselves out of in this regard.

On the other hand, they do plenty of marketing and reach-out to new filmmakers (how many Super 8 products were at SXSW?) so I'm glad someone is trying to market Super 8 past the faithful.

[Will2]

I would also add that the folks at Spectra love what they do and are great at helping people through the process. Their website shows that their Spirit is up and running. If you haven't had a Spirit transfer with film I suggest giving it a try; it's pretty amazing.

I also love their Velvia 50 Super 8, a great alternative to Ektachrome.