|  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

I cannot comment on the latter, but for the former, in most cases they are just a interface to the studio buyer/bookers. A notable exception seems to be WB, where Swank sometimes gets their own prints.

But as you'd expect, it's much less a function of Swank and much more a function of who has (ab)used the print before you.

It also depends on the age of a print. If you rent something that hit first-run 3 months ago, it's a big difference than if you rent something that came out 3 years ago...

I must also warn you that in my last position, I had a lot of problems with 35mm bookings through Swank. They are almost always simply a "middle man" in the 35mm rental process, and that often leads to late, mis-delivered or lost prints and a lot of miscommunication.

If you are looking at 16mm, the prints are a mixed bag as well, but fairly often, they are better than average. Prints may be pretty scratched up, but the color is usually quite good. I haven't seen many pink or fading prints come from them. Swank owns many 16mm prints and I have found that booking 16mm with them is quite easy and reliable.

The unfortunate thing about 16mm rentals in general, especially in non-theatrical venues like colleges and Universities, is that video plunged a knife into that market, and DVD and the availabliity of good video projection is turning that knife. That means we will see fewer and fewer new 16mm prints struck of old films and the rental houses will go the way of the eight track. Kit Parker's demise was the first part of that process.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

But hey, they don't have a monopoly on such a...surprising...name.
There's Hilary Swank, too, etc.

Trying to get back on topic, Bill, did you mean their 35mm or
their 16mm, or what?

Joe said, "I can most often guarantee that you will not get the best print they have." This is probably true, but my experience has been:

• On recent films, the studios and the TES/ETS probably don't know what's a "good print" and what isn't. It's not like there are people doing inspections, especially before a title gets junked. I imagine there are archival prints that have never been shown, or Show/Select prints that have been specially saved, though I suspect those don't circulate to most of the theatrical market anyhow.
  
• ETS is pretty much a black box for me, but with respect to Technicolor, they don't seem to have multiple pools of a given print. So I think that the non-theatricals through Swank are in the same boat as the theatricals (though of course, non-theatricals and sub runs are much more likely to get a used print). Note that this is only for the case where the studio prints are actually handled through Technicolor, and not for those rare cases where the studio goes through ETS, but "gives" Swank some prints, and then Swank subcontracts to Technicolor to distribute those prints. Such prints are identified on their film can label as "Swank/TITLE" rather than "TITLE", and usually have single-digit print numbers.
  

 |  IP: Logged