SuperMuppet64
2023-11-04T01:26:57Z
both specials use arthurian themes. the telltale signs that it's the filmation special is the production code (GGWB) and the appearance of pepe le pew (who does not appear in the chuck jones special). i often see drawings from this special turn up. sometimes they are not identified and are simply sold as generic "looney tunes" drawings

filmation was working off the latest of the pre-63 shutdown models for most of the characters. daffy, porky and sam all have that early 60s look, and there's a background in the special with framed photos of daffy lined up in a row, all faces from the 60s chuck jones model sheet
S. C. MacPeter
2023-11-19T21:37:43Z
A print from the rare SING AND BE HAPPY series  Dave Fleischer did for Universal during the period Lantz had signed with UA was on ebay earlier this month. Happy to say I won it and will give some thoughts when it arrives
ToonStar95
2023-12-30T20:35:07Z
A 35mm print of Cinderella from the 1981 reissue. 

This version was matted into non-anamorphic widescreen, with the titles squished and the movie itself cropped at the top and bottom. I know it's from '81 because I saw another widescreen print on eBay years ago that showed it had the early-1980's Buena Vista logo (with the blocky script) at the start.
Bobby Bickert
2023-12-31T21:25:46Z
Originally Posted by: ToonStar95 

A 35mm print of Cinderella from the 1981 reissue. 

This version was matted into non-anamorphic widescreen, with the titles squished and the movie itself cropped at the top and bottom. I know it's from '81 because I saw another widescreen print on eBay years ago that showed it had the early-1980's Buena Vista logo (with the blocky script) at the start.



This eBay seller also has a 35mm print of Peter Pan. Pretty much the same as Cinderella, re-release print, matted widescreen, though the seller doesn't say whether it's Technicolor or Eastman Color.

nickramer
2024-01-01T07:27:30Z
Here's the said print for "Peter Pan":

https://www.ebay.com/itm...sid=p4429486.c101224.m-1 
Zachary
2024-01-19T03:12:35Z
Sold yesterday: a 16mm dupe of Popeye the Sailor (1933) with the original Paramount logos.  There's video of the opening, too. From the description: "after the number '3' states: 'J. Somberg printed 11/3/70' "

And just sold today:

35mm nitrate "composite" print of Bosko the Talk-Ink Kid

35mm silent print of Mischievous Mice

I see that Mr. Helpful informed the seller of what they had regarding the latter. Looks like a bunch of folks recognized these two for what they are, and they each sold for $2,025 plus shipping.
S. C. MacPeter
2024-01-19T11:40:18Z
I noticed notches inbetween the sprockets on both, indicating that they are safetys and NOT nitrates (sometimes the notice of nitrate would bleed onto the newly produced print)
Zachary
2024-01-19T23:23:21Z
The white-on-black edge markings are indeed printed through from the negative(s), but the ninth photo on the Bosko listing shows a crisp black "NITRATE FILM" marking, belonging to that print's stock. My initial assumption was that the Mice print is nitrate, but the seller's photos did not include such an edge marking for that print. On neither listing did the seller's photos capture a black "KODAK" marking, the symbols immediately following which are the stock's date code.

If by "notches inbetween the sprockets" you mean the little black lines every fourth sprocket (one per frame or frame line), those actually do go back to the period of these films. I archived the eBay listing and photos for the nitrate print of Van Beuren's The Office Boy (1930) that Steve Stanchfield won years back, and it has them too. One of those photos is below to illustrate.

UserPostedImage 
Tommy Stathes
2024-01-20T03:08:33Z
I think Mac is talking about the grayish marks below, which are typical of fairly modern safety prints and vary in style. It's also possible to get black print-through edge markings from an earlier source element in a new print; it all depends on the type of source element and also the type of print/duplicate being made, as well as certain settings being chosen during the new printing process.

UserPostedImage

Conventional wisdom is usually more black and white about all this —i.e. white markings are print-through from a neg; black are *only* on the physical print...yet that's not always true in every last case. There are more variables and possibilities than that.

Case in point: Below is a modern 16mm lowfade dupe, on 1980s or 90s LPP stock, of a Cinecolor Rainbow Parade cartoon. The print doesn't have any modern edge markings at all (except the dark bars above and below the sprockets), and the dark EASTMAN marking on the 1940s Cinecolor positive print is present in the new dupe. It's kind of neat to see a completely faithful, straight ahead dupe of an old print like that on new stock...right down to the original sprocket field from the source positive.

UserPostedImage
Zachary
2024-01-20T04:32:49Z
Tommy, thanks for the clarifications and insight. You are, of course, correct that the color alone isn't determinative and black markings could be printed through from an earlier-generation positive, but that's the reason for my "crisp" qualifier: I would expect printed-through markings to exhibit some fuzziness or other clues consistent with being duplicated off another element. The white markings on the eBay listings and the Office Boy print are cases in point, as is your 16mm example (especially close the sprocket holes). The Bosko print's black-on-clear markings, including the "EASTMAN" mark in the third photo, are sharp and look consistent with what I've seen with other examples of Kodak print stock. That being said, my level of knowledge and experience with film is mostly "armchair", so I'll defer to the judgment of you and others who handle this stuff regularly.
Tommy Stathes
2024-01-20T06:27:14Z
I appreciate that Zachary, though I should say I definitely don't know everything. It's also not always possible to be totally certain of an anomaly without being able to inspect something in person. So, what I'm stating is only slightly-informed guesswork based on some past experience. Even the sharpness or fuzziness of edge markings can be its own tricky or misleading set of variables, both on a print and on a dupe. I have plenty of old release prints with faint or fuzzy edge markings. Some really well made dupes are also sharper than certain release prints. The dupe you see of the VB happens to be very soft, partly because the original was probably a bit shrunken/buckled and maybe not laying totally flat in the printer. If the edge marking was really strong, and the print was rock solid in the printer, and a really good printer/set of optics was being used, that old edge marking might have printed through looking really sharp. And all the more possible with 35mm elements, if printed/duped excellently...