PRO8MM FILM RIPOFF!!!

Post by **Uppsala BildTeknik** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:32 pm

I beat you with 20 a few hour ago I think!

Post by **reflex** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:40 pm

Uppsala BildTeknik wrote:I beat you with 20 a few hour ago I think!

Inflation! ;) OK. I will donate $20 next time.

I had no idea how much it cost to keep the site running (and how little is being donated) until I read Andreas' post. Perhaps this info could be shown as a little graphic chart on the front page? I'm sure that many regular readers would donate if they knew how important it was.

Santo · Post by **Santo** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:46 pm

Nigel wrote:I got screwed by Pro8 back in 1998 on a music video I was shooting. The director/producer insisted that we use Pro8 due to their "One Stop Shopping" even though we were shotting K40. I bt my lip since I wasn't paying.

Well, neddless to say that the k40 that they did send was out of date!!! Then when I called them they said that all film sales are final and that the stock would be fine. I was pissed and have been railing against them ever since. I filed a complaint with the California Attorney General just ti spite them.

I suggest that you do the same. They are crooks and I will be happy to say so. Lately I have been staying out of the Anti-Pro8 threads but I can't help myself sometimes.

Now, that the board seems to be one of their major ad outlets(Look at the two front page "Articles" written by them) I feel obligated to.

Good Luck

So let me get this straight. Here's the facts as Nigel presents them:

7 years ago Pro8 supplied some k40 which was past its expiry date for a music video shoot that Nigel was not paying for, and as a result he's been mad at them ever since.

That's it? Did you use this K40? Did it turn out when processed? I'm not saying it's right that Pro8 did such a thing, but was your shoot ruined? Or did your producer/director (or whomever was paying for this) buy fresh stock elsewhere? Did the person who actually got the fuzzy end of the lolipop take Pro8 to small claims court? It seems odd you would file a complaint and not the person who might have been financially wronged.

Frankly, this just doesn't add up. A 7 year grudge over a few carts of out of date film that presented no financial loss for you, but resulted in reams of posts on webboards against this company to his day calling them crooks. There's got to be something more to this...I mean if it cost you some money and ruined your own project (or delayed it), I know I'd be pissed. But 7 years later, a project which was not your own, which you weren't paying for, and you're still wasting keystrokes and time stewing over it?

Alex · Post by **Alex** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:24 pm

The thing is Kodachrome 40 out of date by less than a year should be perfect. Some have used way old K-40, that I think is just being lucky, but up to a year over the expiration date should be fine if the unopened film was maintained well.

1997 may have been the year that Kodak got behind with their inventory and perhaps that's all there was to sell. But I am curious as well as to how Nigel's Kodachrome film actually came out.

Post by **timdrage** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:02 pm

Perhaps you misunderstood what I was getting at. What I am saying is that a business like Pro8 should be paying you for that de facto advertising.

Not at all... it's just a press release, if you run a news site you post whatever stories which are relevent to the theme of the site. It's not free advertising any more than mainstream news stories about products/companies are... (which is to say, it totally IS free advertising!

but that's the way the news works.)

Press releases are fun. If you've ever believed anything you read in the news, try writing a good press release about something you've done and send it out to everyone. If you do a good enough job people will publish it wholesale as an article without any particular fact checking or extra journalism!

YouTube · Post by **Andreas Wideroe** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:21 pm

Thanks guys! You just doubled the donations so far this year!

Keep it up and I'll do my best to keep this site great and to improve it even more!

I will keep on posting press releases and other news as I get them. I think it's the best way to find out what's up in the professional scene of small gauge filmmaking. Also, a filmfestival winner and all other interesting things will be posted when you alert me.

Post by **mattias** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:26 pm

is there a front page on this site? my bookmark goes to the forum index (even though some might think it goes directly to the reply button). :-)

/matt

Post by **Uppsala BildTeknik** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:28 pm

my bookmark goes to the forum index

So does mine!

Post by **gianni1** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 pm

I have no problem with pro8, except that 8 rolls of neg film I bought for next to nothing at a UK camera fair, will not get free processing (I knew that when I bought them).

OT Super 8, but related to press releases. Maybe a script for my next Super 8 film...

Recently in my local newspaper, the TV tax man got a press release published as factoids. It was pure disinformation, without any fact checking by the local reporter who bylined the article and photographs.

They wrote about the "new technology" inside the "dectector vans" scanning neighbourhoods for unlicensed TV viewers. The paper would not publish my letter to the editor which questioned why the reporter didn't look inside the van, or question the PR person about the technology. I was annoyed by the the illusion and intimidation, using bad science, to promote the BBC's mandate for "free" broadcasting.

I know from personal experience, that the Post Office computer database and rule of law is used, not the TV Van myth. The law assumes that every household has a TV, and if any residence in the country misses the annual payment, it's flagged and investigated.

Gianni

P.S. TV Vans are real, I retract the statement... :!:

YouTube · Post by **Andreas Wideroe** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:57 pm

mattias wrote:my bookmark goes to the forum index (even though some might think it goes directly to the reply button).

Hahaha :lol: That is funny!

Post by **Bjorn Andersson** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:14 pm

Have a look at the members list.

No 1411.

Post by **reflex** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:22 pm

Bjorn Andersson wrote:Have a look at the members list.

No 1411.

Thanks for the heads-up, Bjorn. I hope that Rhonda will speak up.

James

Post by **Uppsala BildTeknik** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:28 pm

Have a look at the members list.

No 1411.

Cool, interesting to see if they can/will speak up, and what they have to say.

Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:29 pm

David M. Leugers wrote:For testing of registration, scratching and for light leaks of the magazine, why not take the 50ft spool of film from inside a Kodak cartridge and load it in the Supermag? Seems to me a simple way to get pristine film for testing. The short load is no big deal because a larger load only tests the feed and takeup of the magazine and I am sure that has already been accomplished.

David M. Leugers

This is very true. However, I tried that approach and I had trouble getting the film out of the cartridge without damage. The film got scratched up in the removal. I tried it....and it did. What I did do is shoot 200 feet of K-40 that I bought from Germany. The problem is I haven't got it back yet. So I don't know if it was scratched too. I hope it arrives in the mail soon.

Post by **Juno** » Fri Mar 25, 2005 11:20 am

awand wrote:Thanks guys! You just doubled the donations so far this year! Keep it up and I'll do my best to keep this site great and to improve it even more!

I will keep on posting press releases and other news as I get them. I think it's the best way to find out what's up in the professional scene of small gauge filmmaking. Also, a filmfestival winner and all other interesting things will be posted when you alert me.

I am surprised that Roger doesn't give you a significant contribution since he made a new living for himself off of this forum.