Hey everyone,
I own a large collection of VHS tapes. In an effort to save some money I am considering transferring all of my original tapes to blank VHS tapes and selling off my originals. But I have a few doubts. My rationality is that these transfers will be quality enough to last me a life time and that my need to preserve my collection before its dismantling is essential due to the relative obscurity of most of my movies. Also, it gives me a chance to expand my collection by copying rentals and not having to worry about owning originals which is something I used to take more pride in. But it burns me inside to consider doing this because 1.) I've spent tireless hours tracking down those out of print films just to have the honor of owning originals. 2.) I'll be missing the thrill of the hunt of scouring used movie bins and shelves in grungy run down second rate stores on the bad side of town just to find that copy of "The Prowler" and buying it just because Tom Savini did the makeup 3.) Original box art is impossible to duplicate on a blank VHS tape box. I love every movie I own. I love the fact that I own some movies that are so freaking awful I tease myself and hold the boxes with my sleeves pretending the box will scorch my hands. I love having obscure movies by directors whose names I can mention to professional critics and teachers and invariably get responses of "who?" I also love watching the movies I own. But I'm uncertain of the whole experience of home movies. I can't decide if it is the actual movie that is most important or if it is the experience of having the movie/box/buying experience that is more important.
I have a dilemma and am teetering on the edge, not sure whether to go through with this or not. Do any of you keep duplicate copies or blank tape copies? What are your opinions on this practice? If this influences you in any way, my situation is a 19-year-old living in NC and I am a college student. Also, as of right now, I have filled my closet at home with tapes to the brim and the shelves are buckling under the weight. Furthermore, I haven't actually watched all of the movies I own. Sometimes I would buy a handful of tapes to bolster my collection with the intent on watching them later. That might have been 2 years ago. Thanks for your help.
-Scottie H.
Taking into consideration the added cost of blank tapes and the time it costs you to dupe them, is it really saving anything compared to how cheap used VHS tapes are today? Even with a dubbing enhancer, you are still going to lose a generation on the dubbing, which will affect the quality. Unless you get some good bids on eBay, and have some rare titles, you may stand the chance of investing more in the dupes than you make in selling the originals.
Not to mention that dup'ing and selling the originals is piracy. Now you're probably small enough to fly under the radar but if you put enough up on E-bay there is a risk you could get found out.
He was referring to keeping the dupes and selling the originals. Although. technically it is still considered piracy, it is not quite the same as copying and selling dupes.
I agree with Menard. It wont be worth it to copy all of those tapes and sell them. VHS goes for next to nothing these days. Even selling your more obscure stuff on ebay might not pay off next to the cost of all the blanks and even if you do make a profit it sounds like a hell of alot of work. Personally I just rent or find stuff dirt cheap then get rid of it when I'm done. I only need to see Hercules Against the Moon Men a few times before the joke wears thin, but thats me. It sounds like you enjoy having a collection so why not keep it. Maybe some of it just needs to go in storage or needs to be gotten rid of.
Why not just buy a dvd recorder? There's some seriously nice ones out there for not that much money. For $180-$200 you could get the new panasonic model which is really the top rated unit. I have the DMR-E-55 but there's a new one out there (D10 or something close to that) that can record on any format of blank dvd, has an even better 4 hour quality mode and suppposedly runs smoother. The E-55 I have is is a great machine to begin with so even if you can only get that one you can't go wrong. Seriously I've done tons of movies and rare stuff I have on tape and I haven't had a problem, it's well worth the money. You won't be losing quality like vhs-vhs copying.
StatCat wrote:
> You won't be losing quality like vhs-vhs copying.
Let me add to that statement so that you don't get the idea that there is no quality loss when recording from VHS to DVD. The quality loss can be less pronounced due to the better recording capability of DVD recorders compared to VHS recorders. I use a signal processor between the player and recorder to reduce the signal loss which is evident in transfering media, and it helps to break copyguard (uh..of course I would never use it for such purposes..ahem). I also use a Super VHS recorder to DVD recorder which allows me to use an S-Video connection. If you want to record to DVD from a VCR which has composite out, you are going to need a DVD recorder that has composite in or use a selector box which will allow you to connect composite A/V to an S-Video input. In either case, unless the DVD recorder has a signal processor built-in, you are going to want to use a signal processor to reduce signal loss.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the thing Menard did not state explicitly is that there is ALWAYS some signal loss; the playback of the VHS is not 100% pure in real equipment. Therefore, there will remain some signal loss VHS -> DVD, but it is not as large as VHS -> VHS.
Like most others have said, the money you make from selling off your originals will be way less than the money you will spend by buying new (high quality) VHS tapes.
If you want longevity and high-quality, you would be looking at TDK Hi-Fi VHS tapes in the least. If I was going to be archiving (ha ha) rare movies to keep for the rest of my life, I would buy TDK SuperVHS tapes, even for the quality of the tape itself. Such tapes do not cost little.
Pre-owned VHS tapes are incredibly cheap these days, even if you have a 'good' title.
I have a DVD recorder, and while I like the idea of transferring my entire (gulp) VHS collection to DVD, it would be a very arduous process, I also know that DVD-R longevity is nothing like VHS longevity. I have VHS tapes from twenty years ago which, while a bit fuzzy, are still very watchable. In twenty years time you will be lucky if two-thirds of your DVD's are still playable at all.
My solution would be to simply hang on to your tapes and work out how to make more money, so that you will not have to sell your collection, and be able to bu the right kind of gear. Over time, copy them one-by-one on to SuperVHS tapes via a signal booster as you watch them. That way you will have an original, a high-quality backup copy, and the watching experience.
The alternative is to copy them to DVD-R with a signal booster (keeping the originals, of course) and plan to digitally back up the DVD-R's every few years or so on to better future formats. I am planning a similar method for my computer files.
~Archivist~
I did state that signal loss is evident is transfering media. You are correct, though, that having said that there is always signal loss when dealing with both an analog signal and the playback capabilities of the VCR probably would have been a better way to have worded it. The use of a signal processor in either case would help to improve the signal to noise ratio making for a better transfer. The signal processor, however, reduces signal loss, it does not improve upon the original source (I just mentioned that in the event someone wants to bring that up as well).
Burn the heathens, send them back to the hell they came from...
Long live BETA!!!!!!
ahem...
I mean, good luck with the collection problem you have here scottie, personally I reccomend the idea mentioned of burning onto dvds, if not for the fact that dvds are a great space saver in comparison to vhs [since it sounds like you have a storage problem] but from what it sounds like, you love your collection so I wouldn't go selling them off without being 100% totally sure that you won't regret it later on in life when beta finally takes over and renders vhs obsolete, and therefore 'rare' treat.
Don't laugh, it could happen...
Archivist wrote:
>... I also know that DVD-R longevity is
> nothing like VHS longevity. I have VHS tapes from twenty years
> ago which, while a bit fuzzy, are still very watchable. In
> twenty years time you will be lucky if two-thirds of your DVD's
> are still playable at all.
>
Am I missing something here? Aren't DVDs a little bit more resilient than VHS tapes?
dean wrote:
>
> Burn the heathens, send them back to the hell they came from...
>
>
> Long live BETA!!!!!!
>
I still have some movies on Beta, and the old Sony Betamax may still be at my Mom's house. One title I have on Beta that I never got on VHS (or DVD) is The Wall.
You're discussing piracy here. :( I don't think this is a good use of this board.
Although selling the originals isn't the same thing as selling copies, I think you're kidding yourself when you say it "isn't the same thing" in the 'moral high ground' sense. More like a moral slippery slope sense, I think.
How about just finding another way to get the money you need *legitimately*, or finding a way to spend less? :(
Zapranoth wrote:
> You're discussing piracy here. :( I don't think this is a
> good use of this board.
>
> Although selling the originals isn't the same thing as selling
> copies, I think you're kidding yourself when you say it "isn't
> the same thing" in the 'moral high ground' sense. More like a
> moral slippery slope sense, I think.
>
> How about just finding another way to get the money you need
> *legitimately*, or finding a way to spend less? :(
Are you suggesting that if he sells tapes (the originals) which he owns that he is commiting piracy? Since a lot of us buy used tapes from video stores and flea markets, I guess that would make all of us pirates by your definition.
Aye matey! I'll make ye walk the plank!
Sixteen men on a dead man's chest
Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum
Piracy involves making a copy and then selling either the original or the copy. This instance would probably be too small to notice, but college kids have gotten busted over music downloads.
MY understanding of yo-ho-ho laws concerning copying tapes only has jurisdiction when 1.) I'm selling the copies 2.) I'm showing the copies for money, or 3.) I'm showing the originals for money. Legally I bought the tapes, and on the FBI thingy before the movie starts, I think it only applies to making money on duplicates or distributing for profit duplicates without consent and paying royalties.The same applies for exhibition.
This is why in the tape trading world of Mystery Science Theater 3000, if you have a copy off of the tv and you sell it, it is accepted. Now, if you take a Rhino home video and copy that and sell it, then you are breaking law. I will not be selling my copies. They are mine. I have dozens of Comedy Central era MST3K episodes as well as Sci-Fi era episodes I have personally recorded from TV, and have sold a few copies. I have also bought copies from other people.
Anyways..... I don't think I will be selling my tapes. I just watched Evil Dead II for the first time last night and I never want to sell that movie. I've had it, I've been meaning to watch it, and now that I finally got around to it, I never want to let it go. I'll just rip rentals and keep on building my collection. Screw the system. Hollywood is a greedy business, they don't need anymore money. (how could $20 million be spent on a movie in a few months and not be greedy?)
-Scottie H.
I realize that the horse is dead, and I'm beating it. Nonetheless:
Menard: You propose a different situation than the one of which I wrote. I was addressing what the original poster was proposing: that he copy his originals, sell the originals, *keep the copies*.
Under 'fair use' law, the *content* of the medium, not the physical medium itself, is restricted. If I buy a VHS tape, I can make a copy to keep for my own backup purposes, what have you. I can't give that copy away and keep my original, because, to put it loosely, I've bought one instance of that content, and that's for me.
If I copy the tape and then give, sell, "lend" ... EITHER of those copies, and keep one for myself... that's against current laws, as I understand them.
I could be mistaken, but that's my understanding.
Zapranoth wrote:
>
> I could be mistaken, but that's my understanding.
I won't comment on if your are mistaken or not, because I am sure I don't know. What I will say is that copyright law is a VERY specialized field of law, and there are many lawyers in that field that argue very subtle points every day.
Scottie H, as for Hollywood being greedy, that may be true. But theft is theft, no matter from whom you are stealing. That's my opinion, and others are welcome to disagree with it (I don't want to start a flame war here).
I will say this, though: the Hollywood studios and producers put their money at risk to make those movies, and often lose money. What was the recent 'blockbuster' that took 120 Million to make, and made only 20 Million? Sure, it will make more over time, but that is a lot of money to have tied up in something waiting for return of investment.
Put another way, let's take the 'piracy' arguement to it's extreme. Suppose that piracy grows to the point that the studios really DO lose BIG bucks. How long do you think making movies would remain a business?
And finally, you might think you are only hurting a faceless corp, but there are real people with jobs that work for those studios. Look at all those credits at the end of movies, for example. Electricians, hair stylists, photographers, etc all participate.
Just my 2 cents. I'm not meaning to attack you, just presenting a counter-point to what you wrote.
I'm pretty sure most dvd recorders do have a signal processor built in. Even if there is quality loss it's so miniscule at a decent record setting it's impossible to even notice. I've had tapes that jump and are nearly impossible to watch transferred to dvd and all the jitter was gone.
Here's a good website on the overview of copyright:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/index.html ,
specifically the four factors part:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-b.html
and even more specifically:
4. The Effect of the Use Upon the Potential Market
Another important fair use factor is whether your use deprives the copyright owner of income or undermines a new or potential market for the copyrighted work. As we indicated previously, depriving a copyright owner of income is very likely to trigger a lawsuit. This is true even if you are not competing directly with the original work.
Making a copy for yourself and then selling the original does deprive the CR holder of a sale because now there are two copies when he only sold one.
(And yes I taped lots of friends' records in college.)