Azo status

Discussion in 'Large Format' started by michael_a._smith|1, Jun 2, 2003.

  1. You may have heard that Azo Grade 3 was discontinued. It was,
    but with the help of all Azo users it can be saved.

    June 2, 2003

    AZO GRADE 3: STATUS REPORT: Good news, with a slight
    catch.

    We finally received definitive word from the "powers that be" at
    Kodak regarding the status of Azo Grade 3 in all sizes.

    First, the good news: The good news is that Kodak has told us
    they will continue to manufacture Azo! It is truly amazing that
    Paula and I, with the help of your good letters and emails, which
    we forwarded on to them, were able to convince the Eastman
    Kodak Company to continue to manufacture a product that had
    been discontinued. They told me that they believed this was the
    first time something like this had ever happened.

    Now the slight catch: Kodak has told us they will only do this if
    we buy all of the remaining stock at this time! This significant
    quantity is an amount that is more than double our normal yearly
    order. If we purchase all of the remaining stock, they have
    agreed to give us last year's prices and thus, we will not have to
    raise the price to you. If we cannot buy all of the remaining stock,
    the price of all Grade 3 will immediately be significantly higher,
    as it is all now a "special order."

    Next year, when we reorder, and a new master roll is
    manufactured, it is likely the price will go up, perhaps
    significantly. But for now, because Kodak's price to us will stay
    the same (provided we buy this whole roll), our price to you can
    stay the same. This also means that beginning now, when we
    buy all of the current remaining supply, it is likely we will be the
    only supplier of this product, worldwide.

    In order to place our large order with Kodak at this time and to
    keep Azo alive, we need your help. No, we are not asking for
    donations. What we are asking, however, is that you place your
    orders NOW for Grade 3 (and for Grade 2 for that matter, as we
    must place our yearly order for that, too, at this time). If we do not
    receive enough orders, it is possible that we will not be able to
    make this purchase.

    Here is what we have in current stock:

    Grade 3: We have only a very few boxes of 20x24 on hand.
    Currently we are out of stock for Grade 3 8x10 in both 100-sheet
    and 500-sheet sizes.

    Grade 2: We have only a very few boxes of 8x10 in both
    100-sheet and 500-sheet boxes on hand, and we are out of
    stock for Grade 2 in 20x24.

    Therefore, we are eager to place our new order with Kodak
    immediately and to fill your requests for any amount you may be
    ordering.

    PLEASE PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW. We will not cash your
    check or process your credit card until we are ready to make
    shipments, but at this time we do need your order--perhaps even
    your total expected order for the forthcoming year if at all
    possible.

    We will calculate shipping and handling and tell you the amount
    either for writing a check or for crediting your credit card. We
    happily accept all major credit cards, as do all merchants, but at
    this time, when this particularly large order must be placed, if you
    could make payment by check it would be most helpful and
    appreciated. When orders are charged to credit cards we must
    pay a percentage of sales to the credit card company, and those
    3% charges do add up. Thank you.

    Were we wealthy we would just do this ourselves, but we simply
    cannot. We thank you in advance for helping us keep Azo Grade
    3 in production, and Azo Grade 2, as well. Were there only one
    grade of Azo remaining, this beautiful paper certainly would not
    last long.

    Please contact us at michaelandpaula@michaelandpaula.com.

    With many thanks for helping us keep Azo alive,

    Michael A. Smith and Paula Chamlee
     
  2. Lets validate a passion for this unique photographic paper by those that have spearheaded the cause by reaching for the checkbook.

    I will be contacting you Michael for my purchase.

    Cheers!
     
  3. Platinum is looking better all the time. Good luck with your order.
     
  4. There is enough evidence that Azo is a remarkably unique and beautiful paper - both sensitometric evidence and anecdotal evidence by really fine printers. See some of the sensitometric comparisons at www.michaelandpaula.com and at www.unblinkingeye.com. Platinum does yield beautiful prints - although you might want to read Bob Herbst's sensitometric comparison of Azo and platinum - but so does Azo, in a different way. So, abandoning Azo because platinum is nice is not a terribly persuasive argument.

    Michael and Paula's single-handed efforts have probably been instrumental in keeping Azo alive - they have obtained multiple reprieves for the paper and kept the bean counters at bay for many years now. If you are commited to contact printing, any help in keeping this paper alive really matters.

    Remember, this is the oldest available paper at this point, and the only true silver chloride contact paper available on the market.

    Cheers, DJ
     
  5. Although I've been using a 4x5 for 30 years or so, I'm new to 8x10 and contact printing. Thus, I've never used Azo. I read much of the Azo information on your site, and I'm intrigued. But, before making a major shift in current processes, I'd love to see some actual comparisons between contact prints made on Azo versus the same negative on conventional papers. Is there a site that shows such comparative scans? (I recognize that much of the print's range will be lost in the scanning process, but that loss should be reasonably consistent for both paper types.)

    Thanks for any pointers you can provide.
     
  6. Hi DJ. I've got no axe to grind with Azo, it's a lovely paper, but I don't see the logic in investing in a material or process on the brink of discontinuation when there are such apealing alternatives as Platinum, which can't be discontinued at the whim of a single administrator or even a board of directors, from a huge multinational conglomerate. Beyond that, let's be frank, M.A. Smith is not trying to organize a non-profit cooperative of Azo users, he's calling for patrons to fund his own use of his favorite material. If Azo is important to you, and you want to cut M.A. Smith in on Kodak's action, that's your prerogative. I prefer the look of Platinum prints, densitometric comparisons notwithstanding, and will happily coat my own paper in to my golden years, without ever feeling the need to buy a lifetime supply of anything. I wish you all the best of luck in continuing the production of a product that is obviously very important to you.
    Sincerely,
    Jay De Fehr
     
  7. "Beyond that, let's be frank, M.A. Smith is not trying to organize a
    non-profit cooperative of Azo users, he's calling for patrons to
    fund his own use of his favorite material."

    You can prefer Platinum prints to Azo prints. That's your
    prerogative. But your comment above is gratuitously nasty. What
    we do by selling Azo is make it available to others. And there are
    many others who find photographs printed on Azo to be as
    beautiful as we find them.

    I have long said that if anyone else wants to take over the Azo
    "business" they are more than welcome. Because margins are
    very thin, for the time it takes up, selling Azo doesn't begin to pay
    for itself when that time is figured in. And it has taken a lot of time
    and effort to preserve this paper. Sure, we want it for ourselves,
    but if that was the only issue we would have kept the orders we
    placed in the past for ourselves, gotten our own lifetime supply,
    and then said, "That's it. No more." And we would be making the
    beautiful Azo prints and everyone else would be out of luck. But
    we want others to be able to be able to make contact prints as
    they were made by the great modernist photographers so we
    started selling it. Pinning selfish motives about this on me
    doesn't stick, and really, you should apologize.

    Yes, Azo is on the brink of discontinuation. But for now, at least,
    with enough support, it will be preserved for a good number of
    years and maybe a very, very long time. I know that long after we
    have our own supply safely frozen we'll continue to work to
    preserve it and I believe that against all odds we will be
    successful.
     
  8. lwg

    lwg

    Michael, I only shoot 4x5 and don't much care for the size of 4x5 contact prints. I am interested in moving to a larger format to do contact printing, either AZO or platinum, but I haven't seen any AZO or platinum prints, so I can't really decide if there is an advatage. If you were willing to start selling sample packs of AZO, and maybe Amidol, I would try some. But as it is I don't want to buy a 100 sheet box and not use most of it. The advantage to you is it may help you increase sales.
     
  9. As was stated above, Michael and Paula are not in this to make money so to hand out free paper would be a little on the ridiculous side of things. They do this to keep AZO in production. If one considers the time involved with maintaining orders, shipping and corresponding with Kodak (and marketing the product here), it is very admirable that they continue to do this. If you wish to try AZO out, you should spend some money and buy a box. You will be glad you did.
     
  10. lwg

    lwg

    I was not talking about free paper, just a smaller sample pack of 10 or 20 sheets of 8x10 for $1 to $1.25 a sheet. The only extra cost would be in time and packaging. At this price it is more than the $.86 per sheet in 100 count box, but seems more worthwhile to me if I only want to test out the paper. When I try a new paper I always buy a 25 sheet pack of 8x10 even though I usually buy 11x14 in 50 or 100 sheet boxes. I understand that Michael is not doing this as a charity and I appreciate his desire to keep AZO in production for all of us. I am simply offering a suggestion that may help sell more AZO.
     
  11. Mr. Gebhardt:

    It's unlikely that you'll learn enough about Azo by trying 10 or even 25 sheets. It's probably unlikely that you'll know enough after 100 sheets. "Trial sizes," as you suggest, aren't enough to do Azo, or your energy, justice.

    I suggest that you splurge on a box of 100 of each grade, and commit yourself to crawl inside the materials and really KNOW for yourself whether it's for you. Ask for advice on how to tune your negatives to get the most out of the paper, and how to work with the paper itself. It won't be easy, but it will be worth it for you: Even if you decide that it's not your favorite, you will have learned a ton, and will be a better photographer. Relatively speaking, it will be an inexpensive lesson.

    In any case, all the best.

    Bruce Barlow
     
  12. "I wish you all the best of luck in continuing the production of a product that is obviously very important to you. Sincerely, Jay De Fehr"

    I fail to see anything "sincere" in your comment - other words come to mind to describe it, but that is not one of them.

    Oh, and Platinum is not an "alternative" to Azo - or to anything else - it is a process in its own right - you may as well ask why bother with Platinum when you can use digital... makes as much sense.

    I do not use Azo and do not expect to ever want to - enlarged 5x4s will do me nicely thanks very much, so I *genuinely* do not have an axe to grind. Best of luck in your endeavours Michael.

    Cheers,
     
  13. I agree it would help sell the paper. Yet why would he spend all of the time packaging, mailing, e-mailing etc. when he could be out there making photos (his real profession/business)? Let's just be greatful that Michael took on the responsibility and management of keeping AZO in production and take advantage of it.
     
  14. First I think it's admirable that your trying to keep this item alive and have
    turned many onto something that they now appreciate. I too agree with L.W.
    and would buy a sampler pack with Amidol at a price. Love to try it, but I do
    enjoy coating and printing. I had looked at and skipped over Azo and decided
    to try Ziatype only because of the Azo water requirements being so much
    higher. I'd still like to try it tho and always like to support if I can no matter at
    what level.

    Quote "This significant quantity is an amount that is more than double our
    normal yearly order." ... and then...... Quote "Next year, when we reorder,
    and a new master roll is manufactured, it is likely the price will go up, perhaps
    significantly." Michael, you have to buy more next year after buying up a 2
    year supply now? And what of the price increase, not that it's cheap to
    produce, but is Kodak putting a squeeze on you to make a commitant so that
    they can do this once again? I would love to see all the older films, paper and
    process survive, but is this Kodak trying to make an Azo salesman out of you.
    If I were you I'd ask for company sponsership.

    Lastly, I'd buy the patent and have it coated elsewhere. Btw, Is there an
    expiration date on this stuff? Good luck with your order. Put me down for a 25
    sheet package if you decide to make a sampler.
     
  15. Azo is a lovely process as is platinum/palladium. Personally, as a palladium printer I am partial to what I know and do. However, I don't see why people need to be inflammatory and find fault with what Mr. Smith is doing.

    Personally, I recently purchased a box of 20x24 Azo to try and help the cause. I will probably never use it all up, but who knows.

    Mr. Smith makes a living through photography. It takes time to place an order for this stuff, get it in, take orders and ship it out. He has every right to make some money on this stuff or at the very least cover his costs.

    I think that instead of attacking someone and trying to find fault the old adage of "say nothing if you have nothing nice to say" would be appropriate in these cases.

    Think about it.
     
  16. "Beyond that, let's be frank, M.A. Smith is not trying to organize a non-profit cooperative of Azo users, he's calling for patrons to fund his own use of his favorite material. If Azo is important to you, and you want to cut M.A. Smith in on Kodak's action, that's your prerogative."

    By all means, let's do be frank.

    Attempting to impugn Michael Smith's or Paula Chamlee's motives in this regard is utterly disgraceful. I can testify from personal knowledge that they work literally from dawn to midnight, 365 days per year in passionate pursuit of the fine photograph. They are the only photographers of world class stature willing to share their techniques.

    They sell Azo because it's the only way they can make it available to the rest of us. If all they wanted to do was continue to make the finest black and white photographic prints in the world today, they would simply put a lifetime supply in the freezer and be done with it, just as they did with Super XX. I and the other photographers who know them will always be grateful for their efforts to make it possible for the rest of us to use this finest of all papers. They do this because what is really important to them is photography above all else. Personal aggrandizement is just not in their vocabulary.

    Thanks, M&P, for being the true "Friends of Photography".
     
  17. hmmm....is funny, if someone starts a thread about pt, and someone responds with "hey try azo, it is great." Nobody gets upset or flames he/she. When the opposite occurs he gets stomped into the ground, why is that?

    Dhananjay, I have read the article by Bob Herbst and if anything it confirmed my beleif that Azo and pt are much different processes, Azo has better separation in the shadows, pt in the highlights. If anybodys taste runs toward the silver look then azo is fine, but nothing better than can be done by a competent printer as evidenced by Sexton, Barbaum, Caponigro..etc, etc.

    I cannot speak for Jay, but I fail to understand why everybody gets upset when someone points out that Mr. Smith is selling Azo at a profit (however small the profit)and not at cost to "keep it alive." It is not a matter of "taking over the bussiness," it is a matter of why would anybody want to? with a paper that seem not to be very popular. If azo is the magic bullet it is touted to be, why not sell it in 25 packs, after all if the prints are going to be that much better you would think you would need less paper...no? I think sometimes people get frustrated with the incesant marketing that goes on with azo, rarely does one see a post about azo which does not include the "buy azo from Michael and Paula" and usually comes with the innuendo that we should do so because it is the greatest photographic printing method and why should anybody want to do anything else?

    To me comparing azo and pt/pd is an exercise in futility, but once it was mentioned, give the guy a break. Nobody gains or wins if a printing material disappears, but if azo did get discontinued the photographic world would continue, and we should learn to adapt. I am getting ready for the day when film will dissappear if it does so in my life time. So in that sense Jay does have a good point, those who are learning to coat their own paper will always have a venue and dont have to worry about making one year orders to keep their favorite method alive.
     
  18. Oh, and by the way LW, some people on this forum wanted to look at pt/pd prints so I offered to send some on a revolving list. If you want to be included send me an e mail withyour address and I will put you as one of the recipients. How this works is I will send a couple of prints to a person in CA and he will look at them and then in turn mail them to the next person in the list. If you are willing to do this you are welcome to view the prints.
     
  19. Greetings,

    Michael & Paula also host a discussion forum devoted to Azo, which can be found here: http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/index_skip.html

    Perhaps those of you interested in trying "sample" packs, should get together and split a box. As has already been suggested, you really need to use the stuff to get to know it and a 25 sheet sample pack may not be enough. Azo is very different from convention silver paper and requires a negative that most silver printers avoid.

    Regards, Pete
     
  20. Jorge Gasteazoro wrote:

    "hmmm....is funny, if someone starts a thread about pt, and
    someone responds with "hey try azo, it is great." Nobody gets
    upset or flames he/she. When the opposite occurs he gets
    stomped into the ground, why is that?"

    Jorge, you need to read more carefully. No one got upset with Mr.
    De Fehr because he introduced platinum into the discussion. I
    got upset, and it is heartwarming to see that others did as well,
    because he wrote implying that I was doing this only for my own
    self interest.

    "Beyond that, let's be frank, M.A. Smith is not trying to organize a
    non-profit cooperative of Azo users, he's calling for patrons to
    fund his own use of his favorite material. If Azo is important to
    you, and you want to cut M.A. Smith in on Kodak's action, that's
    your prerogative."

    And much of the rest of his writing has a negative tone that
    others picked up on. The comments he received have nothing to
    do with platinum.

    "Dhananjay, I have read the article by Bob Herbst and if anything
    it confirmed my beleif that Azo and pt are much different
    processes, Azo has better separation in the shadows, pt in the
    highlights."

    Bob Herbst's article proves that Azo has better separation in the
    highlights, too. It has a much longer scale than platinum. Just
    one step less, but a greater density range--hence better
    separation. At least that is the way I read it.

    "If anybody's taste runs toward the silver look then Azo is fine, but
    nothing better than can be done by a competent printer as
    evidenced by Sexton, Barbaum, Caponigro..etc, etc."

    That's simply not true. Wonderful enlargements can be made.
    But I believe that any connoisseur of the fine print when viewing,
    side by side, well made prints on Azo and well made prints on
    enlarging paper would always prefer the richer and more subtle
    prints on Azo. Most viewers, even many sophisticated ones,
    cannot see the difference, but that does not mean it is not there.
    Many people cannot hear certain subtleties in fine music, but that
    does not mean they are not there.

    "I cannot speak for Jay, but I fail to understand why everybody
    gets upset when someone points out that Mr. Smith is selling
    Azo at a profit (however small the profit)and not at cost to 'keep it
    alive.' "

    Come on, Jorge. Please read more carefully. That is not the
    issue. See above. He said that we were saving Azo "to fund his
    own use of his favorite material." That is simply not true. I took it
    as a slur and an insult, which I believe it is.

    "If azo is the magic bullet it is touted to be, why not sell it in 25
    packs, after all if the prints are going to be that much better you
    would think you would need less paper...no?"

    "Why not sell it in 25-sheet packs?" Because we cannot get it
    that way. We simply do not have the time to open a large box and
    repack it. As someone so kindly pointed out, we are
    photographers, not a photographic supply store. And even if we
    wanted to repack it, we do not have the wrapping materials to put
    a 25-sheet pack into. If someone would like to invest in black
    bags suitable for 25 sheets, backing cardboard, and a
    somewhat stiff mailer, then, maybe we could do it. But if we had
    to our spend time and money buying that stuff we would have to
    charge about $50 for 25-sheets, clearly an absurd price.

    Michael A. Smith
     
  21. Michael, would you fill an empty 8x10 box with 25 sheets if I mailed it to you?
     
  22. Jorge, you need to read more carefully. No one got upset with Mr. De Fehr because he introduced platinum into the discussion. I got upset, and it is heartwarming to see that others did as well, because he wrote implying that I was doing this only for my own self interest.
    I read it carefully and understood what he meant, perhaps you did not. 1.- you would like to have Azo present for your own use. 2.- you make a profit of these sales. If they are not what you want that is not his fault. Specially in view that your prices are higher than other dealers. If one takes into account that you make large purchases to get a price break, and you profit from the subsequent sales, then it is understandable he believes this is for your own self interest, the fact that other people benefits from your efforts to keep azo in the market has nothing to do with this. And is certainly not an altruistic mission, or you would be selling the paper at cost. Every business and business person knows that if a product requires more effort to distribute than what is worth and the profits are not there then they should cut their loses and move on, if you have not done this perhaps it is because you are making a profit that warrants all your efforts.
    Bob Herbst's article proves that Azo has better separation in the highlights, too. It has a much longer scale than platinum. Just one step less, but a greater density range--hence better separation. At least that is the way I read it.
    That is simply not so, although it is true that azo has a longer scale and the pt scale gets compressed the higher density range in the highlights allows a greater separation for pt. It is clear in the article and the step wedges reproduced in that article.
    Here is precisely the problem which irks some people, if one does not tout azo as the second coming of Christ the people who prefer azo become incensed and people who disagree are hammered down just because they point out the differences from azo. You are a perfect example, I have read you mention pt prints as "dull and lifeless", POP as not as good as Azo, etc, etc. One would think Azo should be the only paper out there and the only way in which a B&W print should be made.
    That's simply not true. Wonderful enlargements can be made. But I believe that any connoisseur of the fine print when viewing, side by side, well made prints on Azo and well made prints on enlarging paper would always prefer the richer and more subtle prints on Azo. Most viewers, even many sophisticated ones, cannot see the difference, but that does not mean it is not there. Many people cannot hear certain subtleties in fine music, but that does not mean they are not there.
    This is your opinion, and I expected nothing less. After all I have read you call Ansel Adam`s enlargements crappy. Perhaps you are correct and you are the only who sees the king is naked, but your arguments are more of a philosophical nature for smarter people than I. If a tree falls in the woods and there is no body there, does it make a sound? The "subtle" qualities you mention are also contained in pt printing, even more so than in azo yet I know you dismiss them as below par. If one cannot see the differences, are the differences really there? who knows! this one is right up there with the falling tree in the woods.
    Come on, Jorge. Please read more carefully. That is not the issue. See above. He said that we were saving Azo "to fund his own use of his favorite material." That is simply not true. I took it as a slur and an insult, which I believe it is.
    I really don't understand why you have taken offense to this. You do print and market your prints as being contact prints made on Azo and it is a pivotal point in your marketing strategy, so it comes to reason that azo is your favorite material. You do profit from sales of prints and paper, which in turn funds the use of your favorite material. Where is the insult? I don't see anything insulting, inaccurate or misleading about his comment. Seems to me you and your followers have chosen to take offense simply because Jay chose to voice a different preference. There is a big element of self interest in your marketing the use of azo and I think you will have a hard time convincing any reasonable person it is not so. This is just what Jay pointed out and I don't see any insult there and I don't see a reason to get outraged unless it is to quell down a differing opinion.
    Why not sell it in 25-sheet packs?" Because we cannot get it that way. We simply do not have the time to open a large box and repack it. As someone so kindly pointed out, we are photographers, not a photographic supply store
    I did not mean you, I meant Kodak, if this was a paper which produced unequaled results, better than any other paper or process, everybody would be using it and Kodak would be making a mint. The truth is this is not so, it is a product which has found a niche market and few people prefer it over others, as such it is not profitable and the demand is not there. Perhaps the reason that Kodak wants to get rid of this product line every couple of years is because it is not that great of a product.
     
  23. a couple of questions:

    When is Azo going to come out in a reasonable range of grades?

    And what's the easiest way to do my 30x40 prints on Azo?
     
  24. This will be a quick answer to Jorge. I hope everyone finds this
    discussion entertaining.

    I use "M1" to note where Jorge quoted a previous posting of
    mine. "J" obviously notes Jorge's comments and "M2" marks
    current response.

    J: "I read it carefully and understood what he meant, perhaps you
    did not.
    1.- you would like to have Azo present for your own use."

    M2: Of course.

    J: "2.- you make a profit of these sales."

    M2: Barely.

    J: "If they are not what you want that is not his fault. Specially in
    view that your prices are higher than other dealers. If one takes
    into account that you make large purchases to get a price break,
    "

    M2: Other dealers get a much better price break than we do.
    Price break is a function of total purchases of all items from
    Kodak. We only buy Azo--not even enough for a "dealer's"
    minimum. We are set up as a "lab."

    J: "and you profit from the subsequent sales, then it is
    understandable he believes this is for your own self interest, the
    fact that other people benefits from your efforts to keep azo in the
    market has nothing to do with this. And is certainly not an
    altruistic mission, or you would be selling the paper at cost."

    M2: I never said it was altruistic. We are not a charity, but we do
    basically sell the paper at cost--when cost includes shipping
    materials, credit card processing charges, time for our assistant
    to write up orders and box it, or my time to do same. And we
    provide advice on how to use the product and answer questions,
    sometimes endlessly, day and night. Try that with Badger or B&H
    or the others. Is that worth something? It seems to be for those
    who want to know something. Curiously, just before I read your
    response I spoke with someone who had questions about a
    number of things in LF photography. He sent an email that
    arrived as I was open to open the one that came with your
    posting. It said, "Thanks Michael for the most informative 5 mins
    I have had in a long time." And the discussion I had with this
    fellow was not about Azo. What's that worth?

    J: "Every business and business person knows that if a product
    requires more effort to distribute than what is worth and the
    profits are not there then they should cut their loses and move
    on, if you have not done this perhaps it is because you are
    making a profit that warrants all your efforts."

    M2: This is not a "business." If I thought of it as a business I
    should have my head examined.

    M1: "Bob Herbst's article proves that Azo has better separation in
    the highlights, too. It has a much longer scale than platinum.
    Just one step less, but a greater density range--hence better
    separation. At least that is the way I read it."

    J: "That is simply not so, although it is true that azo has a longer
    scale and the pt scale gets compressed the higher density
    range in the highlights allows a greater separation for pt. It is
    clear in the article and the step wedges reproduced in that
    article."

    M2: Glad you agree that Azo has longer scale. If 21 steps means
    more separation than 20 steps, even if the scale is shorter, so
    be it. But because the scale of pt is shorter it appears to have
    less separation, visually.

    J: "Here is precisely the problem which irks some people, if one
    does not tout azo as the second coming of Christ the people
    who prefer azo become incensed and people who disagree are
    hammered down just because they point out the differences
    from azo. You are a perfect example, I have read you mention pt
    prints as "dull and lifeless", POP as not as good as Azo, etc, etc.
    One would think Azo should be the only paper out there and the
    only way in which a B&W print should be made."

    M2: I have seen beautiful POP prints and beautiful platinum
    prints and beautiful albumen prints and beautiful most
    everything prints. But most pt prints are in fact dull and lifeless.
    People bow down in front of them because they are platinum,
    without really looking to see if first they are good prints. And, by
    the way, there are bad Azo prints, too. I even make some myself.

    M1: "That's simply not true. Wonderful enlargements can be
    made. But I believe that any connoisseur of the fine print when
    viewing, side by side, well made prints on Azo and well made
    prints on enlarging paper would always prefer the richer and
    more subtle prints on Azo. Most viewers, even many
    sophisticated ones, cannot see the difference, but that does not
    mean it is not there. Many people cannot hear certain subtleties
    in fine music, but that does not mean they are not there."

    J: "This is your opinion, and I expected nothing less. After all I
    have read you call Ansel Adam`s enlargements crappy. Perhaps
    you are correct and you are the only who sees the king is naked,
    but your arguments are more of a philosophical nature for
    smarter people than I. If a tree falls in the woods and there is no
    body there, does it make a sound? The "subtle" qualities you
    mention are also contained in pt printing, even more so than in
    azo yet I know you dismiss them as below par. If one cannot see
    the differences, are the differences really there? who knows! this
    one is right up there with the falling tree in the woods."

    M2:Five years before I ever printed on or really knew about Azo I
    thought Ansel Adam's enlargements were crappy. His contact
    prints on contact printing paper, however, were something
    else--among the most exquisite and beautiful prints that I have
    ever seen. Nothing philosophical about this. It just requires
    careful observation of what is right there. I seriously listen to
    music, and am an amateur musician, but I cannot begin to hear
    the things in music that many of my musician friends can. And
    there is nothing wrong with my hearing. Much of it has to do with
    knowledge of what is possible. If you don't know what you are
    looking for you can't see it. It is not a philosophical issue that
    people cannot see what is there.

    M1: "Come on, Jorge. Please read more carefully. That is not the
    issue. See above. He said that we were saving Azo "to fund his
    own use of his favorite material." That is simply not true. I took it
    as a slur and an insult, which I believe it is."

    J: "I really don't understand why you have taken offense to this.
    You do print and market your prints as being contact prints made
    on Azo and it is a pivotal point in your marketing strategy, so it
    comes to reason that azo is your favorite material. You do profit
    from sales of prints and paper, which in turn funds the use of
    your favorite material. Where is the insult? I don't see anything
    insulting, inaccurate or misleading about his comment. Seems
    to me you and your followers:

    (M2" Followers? I only know two of those who responded.)

    J: have chosen to take offense simply because Jay chose to
    voice a different preference. There is a big element of self
    interest in your marketing the use of azo and I think you will have
    a hard time convincing any reasonable person it is not so. This
    is just what Jay pointed out and I don't see any insult there and I
    don't see a reason to get outraged unless it is to quell down a
    differing opinion."

    M2: My "marketing strategy" has nothing to do with Azo. 99% of
    the museums and collectors who buy my photographs and
    Paula's photographs have no idea on what paper they are
    printed and couldn't care less. All they know is they are beautiful
    objects to look at and be inspired by.

    M1: "Why not sell it in 25-sheet packs?" Because we cannot get it
    that way. We simply do not have the time to open a large box and
    repack it. As someone so kindly pointed out, we are
    photographers, not a photographic supply store."

    J: "I did not mean you, I meant Kodak, if this was a paper which
    produced unequaled results, better than any other paper or
    process, everybody would be using it and Kodak would be
    making a mint. The truth is this is not so, it is a product
    which has found a niche market and few people prefer it over
    others, as such it is not profitable and the demand is not there.
    Perhaps the reason that Kodak wants to get rid of this product
    line every couple of years is because it is not that great of a
    product."

    M2: Come on, Jorge. Azo is a contact printing paper. The
    percentage of people who make contact prints relative to those
    who make enlargements is minuscule. Even if everyone who
    made contact prints printed on Azo the market (for Kodak) would
    still be minuscule.

    M2: Self-interest? Guilty as charged. Why would Paula and I
    bother with any of this if our own self-interest was not involved. I'll
    indulge my love of quoting my favorite writers: e.e. cummings:
    "Half a century of time and several continents of space, in
    addition to a healthily developed curiosity, haven't yet enabled
    me to locate a single peripherally situated ego."

    Michael A. Smith
     
  25. First a comment on all the those who find it necessary to inpune the character, and motives of those trying to preserve Azo's availability for others. Go make some photographs, and stop being so small and petty.

    Michael, am I the only one who shows any interest in contact printing to Azo on 4x5? You were kind enough to respond to my email around last Christmas. When I was toying with the idea. I even went so far as to buy a 4x5 contact printer on Ebay, but as I have not printed B&W for over 15 years, I did not purchase any chemicals and paper. I see B&H has Azo in Grade 3 4x5 500 sheets as a special order item for about $90. For the amount I would probably print, this could be a life time supply for me.

    Anyone do 4x5 contacts on Azo???

    Michael, do you offer it in 4x5 or would I have to go through B&H??
     
  26. "Anyone do 4x5 contacts on Azo"
    Well, not quite yet but I'm getting geared up for it. Jonathan, with the help of a paper cutter, a box of 100 8x10 sheets will turn into 400 4x5 sheets. That knocks 75% off the cost of paper per print.
     
  27. A few thoughts: 1) The qualities of Azo are objective but subjectively appreciated.
    There is more than one way to be in the world. This diversity can be a good thing.
    Why get our knickers in an argumentative knot about it? 2) ad hominem arguments,
    e.g., about Michael Smith, a) have no bearing on the information posted, b) have no
    merit in any discussion about Azo or other methods of printing, c) demonstrate both
    ignorance and a certain nastiness that is detrimental to photography and creativity.
    3) I don't imagine Michael Smith needs to be defended and I am not a 'disciple' but
    have appreciated what I have learned as well as the spirit in which the information
    was given in help from Michael A. Smith. And, yes, I have found Azo to work for me.
    I am happy that its cause is being championed. Perhaps we would all be happier if we
    kept on topic and avoided becoming personal. Life is too short for pettiness.
     
  28. Michael,

    I appreciate the efforts you and Paula have done for this fine paper. I have almost used up the first box of 100 sheets in 8x10 grade 3that I bought from you. Wonderful stuff. I will log on to your web page in the next few days and order a box of each grade in 8x10.

    For those of you who have not yet tried this paper, please indulge. Even if you shoot mostly 4x5 like me, you will get hooked. Printing doesn't get any easier than this. Oh...use the Amidol!!!

    Beware, you might start getting the itch for larger formats...I'm trying to get in good enough shape to lug my 5x7 gear around, maybe even 8x10 if my wife doesn't freak about a bit more photo gear :)

    For those of us who want to keep using this paper, we need to put our money where our mouths are. And Michael, if you and Paula do make money off this, then God bless you. I know you have worked your asses off trying to keep this in production.
     
  29. M2: I never said it was altruistic. We are not a charity, but we do basically sell the paper at cost--when cost includes shipping materials, credit card processing charges, time for our assistant to write up orders and box it, or my time to do same. And we provide advice on how to use the product and answer questions, sometimes endlessly, day and night. Try that with Badger or B&H or the others. Is that worth something? It seems to be for those who want to know something. Curiously, just before I read your response I spoke with someone who had questions about a number of things in LF photography. He sent an email that arrived as I was open to open the one that came with your posting. It said, "Thanks Michael for the most informative 5 mins I have had in a long time." And the discussion I had with this fellow was not about Azo. What's that worth?
    If it is not altruistic then why do you make it sound like that? What is this "Thanks for helping us keep Azo alive" bit? All those costs you mention are equally shared by other dealers on any type of sales no matter what. I know that Jeff at Badger will talk to you for any questions you have, perhaps he is not very knowledgeable with azo, so he has little to say on the subject, I have spent an hour talking to Kevin Sullivan at Bostick & Sullivan about Ferric Oxalate and problems I was having diluting it. He was very informative and in addition he sent me a fresh supply free of charge. So what it that worth? is worth whatever level of customer service and comfort you provide your customers to increase your sales. Nobody is forcing you to do this and you are certainly not the only one who does it.
    M2: Glad you agree that Azo has longer scale. If 21 steps means more separation than 20 steps, even if the scale is shorter, so be it. But because the scale of pt is shorter it appears to have less separation, visually.
    Uh?...a scale that has 21 steps is longer than a 20 step scale. What is this it has more steps but is shorter so therefore must have less separation? that does no make sense. At least not sensitometrically. If what you mean is that a negative that has a DR gets compressed into a shorter reflection scale when printed in pt, I will agree to that, but that is why we tailor the negative to fit the reproduction scale. As such a negative that has more steps in the highlights must by definition have better separation. Since your perception is greatly biased in favor of azo, I will take with a grain of salt your statement that "visually" it appears to have less separation, this is your perception according to your likes and way of printing.
    M2: I have seen beautiful POP prints and beautiful platinum prints and beautiful albumen prints and beautiful most everything prints. But most pt prints are in fact dull and lifeless. People bow down in front of them because they are platinum, without really looking to see if first they are good prints. And, by the way, there are bad Azo prints, too. I even make some myself.
    Now we are getting to the main point. I will admit that when the platinum resurgence started many people thought them special because they were pt, but since then the novelty has worn off and the standard of printing has been raised to an excellence level. Those who were mediocre have fallen off the side and those who have master this process make incredible prints which have nothing "dull and lifeless" about them. If anything they have better and more glowing highlights than any azo print I have ever seen. Perhaps when you show your photographs people want to learn how to print like you, but when I show my pt prints, even with my meager beginner skills, people want to learn how to do them, that should say something about the process if not the photographer. So when you say that "in fact they are dull and lifeless" that is pure arrogance speaking. You have decided this is a fact, that compared to azo anything else is substandard and although there could be some few exceptions anything other than a print made on azo is a bad print.
    M2:Five years before I ever printed on or really knew about Azo I thought Ansel Adam's enlargements were crappy. His contact prints on contact printing paper, however, were something else--among the most exquisite and beautiful prints that I have ever seen. Nothing philosophical about this. It just requires careful observation of what is right there. I seriously listen to music, and am an amateur musician, but I cannot begin to hear the things in music that many of my musician friends can. And there is nothing wrong with my hearing. Much of it has to do with knowledge of what is possible. If you don't know what you are looking for you can't see it. It is not a philosophical issue that people cannot see what is there
    This statement makes me smile, whenever you and I get in this argument. I get as much cheering e mail as I get death threats. Invariably, those who agree with me, tell me their main objection is not that you push azo so much, but this perceived inflexibility and arrogance which appears in your responses. Right off the vat you dismiss those who don't agree with you as uneducated, inexperienced and that they "cannot see what is there." In other words us morons who cannot see what is plain as day and could not find our a**es with both hands and a mirror...:)
    Again these are your opinions and your perceptions. To borrow your example I have musician friends who are like that, they take me to a jazz bar and tell me about this wonderful musician, and there sits a guy with a bass plucking the cords every so often and going, pluncckk...plaanckk...plllliiunck...and my friends go nuts about this, and ask me, did you hear that? wasn't that wonderful? to me it was god awful music that sounded like moose mating. To them it was heaven, well the same way with the way you evaluate prints and decide what is there or not there. What I see on a print is what you might not see, or what I might "fail" to see might not really be there. I fail to see why is it you are the judge of what constitutes a good print. All your experience gives you is the ability to produce prints which are liked by the people with the same taste for prints you have, nothing more, nothing less.
    M2: My "marketing strategy" has nothing to do with Azo. 99% of the museums and collectors who buy my photographs and Paula's photographs have no idea on what paper they are printed and couldn't care less. All they know is they are beautiful objects to look at and be inspired by.
    So we are back to this uh?...well this still does not answer to me why you took so much offense to Jay`s comment. Nevertheless, those same museums which bought or accepted your print donations might have bought or accepted Witkin`s work. This is no proof of "inspiration" or "beauty" it only proves that your work merits safekeeping for the viewing of future generations. The same applies to collectors, there are as many reasons as to why they might have bought your prints as there are belly buttons or opinions, this in itself does not offer proof beauty or inspiration. Some might have thought them beautiful, some might have thought them a good investment, some might even have bought two because their neighbor bought one and they just have to up stage them...who knows!
    M2: Come on, Jorge. Azo is a contact printing paper. The percentage of people who make contact prints relative to those who make enlargements is minuscule. Even if everyone who made contact prints printed on Azo the market (for Kodak) would still be minuscule.
    Perhaps, I will even concede you the point, but so is pt printing and it has a healthy resurgence with more and more people doing it every day. Inarguably pt printing is more expensive than Azo, so how come azo is not also enjoying such resurgence? Every two or three months we get to read another doomsday letter like the one above, so we get back to the main reason we started this argument, perhaps Jay is correct and there is no reason to get attached to a printing method which is constantly being threatened with being discontinued.
     
  30. M: Winding this down, I hope.

    J: Nevertheless, those same museums which bought or
    accepted your print donations might have bought or accepted
    Witkin`s work. This is no proof of "inspiration" or "beauty" it only
    proves that your work merits safekeeping for the viewing of future
    generations. The same applies to collectors, there are as many
    reasons as to why they might have bought your prints as there
    are belly buttons or opinions, this in itself does not offer
    proof beauty or inspiration. Some might have thought them
    beautiful, some might have thought them a good investment,
    some might even have bought two because their neighbor
    bought one and they just have to up stage them...who knows!

    M: Well, I know because I have direct personal contact with most
    of the buyers of our photographs.

    M (from before): Come on, Jorge. Azo is a contact printing paper.
    The percentage of people who make contact prints relative to
    those who make enlargements is minuscule. Even if everyone
    who made contact prints printed on Azo the market (for Kodak)
    would still be minuscule.

    J: Perhaps, I will even concede you the point, but so is pt printing
    and it has a healthy resurgence with more and more people
    doing it every day. Inarguably pt printing is more expensive than
    Azo, so how come azo is not also enjoying such resurgence?
    Every two or three months we get to read another doomsday
    letter like the one above, so we get back to the main reason we
    started this argument, perhaps Jay is correct and there is no
    reason to get attached to a printing method which is constantly
    being threatened with being discontinued.

    M: In fact, Azo is enjoying a resurgence. I know for a fact that
    more Azo of certain grades and sizes was sold last year than at
    any time for at least the past 10 or so years. And by a huge
    percentage. For many years I was the only buyer of certain
    grades and sizes. Now, a much greater quantity is being bought
    and used. That may still not be enough for Kodak, although they
    ARE keeping the paper in production. It is the last fibre based
    graded paper. Most of the doomsday letters are bogus. Just
    empty rumor. For at least 15 years I have been hearing rumors
    that Azo was no longer being made. They are started by the
    camera stores because they do not want to bother handling a
    product that is not a "big mover." 80% of any shops sales are
    from 20% of the products. In these times, retail stores and
    manufacturers are in a hurry to drop that 20%.

    J: perhaps Jay is correct and there is no reason to get attached
    to a printing method which is constantly being threatened with
    being discontinued.

    M: That's like saying you shouldn't fall in love because there is
    always the risk that it won't work out and you'll be hurt. Jay, and
    perhaps you, (good thing you had that "perhaps" in there) might
    live that cautiously, but I do not.

    Enough Jorge?

    A handshake.

    Michael A. Smith
     
  31. 4x5 Azo has not been made in well over a year. B&H may keep it
    in their catalogue, but that does not mean it is available. If it is, it
    is only what remains of old stock at the warehouse. How's this: if
    anyone wants 4x5, send me an email privately and I will see if it
    is still available. If it is, I will get it for you. At B&Hs price.
     
  32. Absolutely Michael. To all of you who dislike my effrontery of arguing with Michael I can only say that he and I view things differently, and sometimes we argue (heatedly at times) about our differences, and for the life of me I have no idea why he puts up with me. That said, I don't think Jay was trying in any way to impugn his character and I certainly know I was not. Ultimately it is none of my business concerning the sales of azo and he has done a lot for photography, particularly B&W and that can only be good for all photographers regardless of the chosen method of expression. I believe I can argue with someone and still respect them, as I do Michael. I hope azo continues to do well and that all of you who love it can save it.
     
  33. Bob,Platinum is a contact only proces,as is Azo, which would make either an alternative to the other. Question my sincerity if you like, but not my english.
    Michael Kravit, Jim Shanesy, and anyone else who took offense to my post, if you believe M.A. Smith's motives to be selfless, you're either in denial, or very naive. A selfless act for the good of the contact-printing community would be to organize a non-profit co-op to buy Azo in large enough quantities to satisfy the demand of the co-op, and maybe get a price break in the bargain. Not a mind bogglingly difficult concept. It was not my intention to start a debate over M.A. Smith's motives, but here you have it in his own words ". Sure, we want it for ourselves, but if that was the only issue we would have kept the orders we placed in the past for ourselves, gotten our own lifetime supply, and then said, "That's it. No more." And we would be making the beautiful Azo prints and everyone else would be out of luck.( Which is EXACTLY what he did with Super XX) But we want others to be able to be able to make contact prints as they were made by the great modernist photographers so we started selling it." Ask him to sell you a few boxes of Super XX and see how deep his commitment to other photographers runs. And Jim, "I can testify from personal knowledge that they work literally from dawn to midnight, 365 days per year in passionate pursuit of the fine photograph" why do you think that is? To satisfy the world"s hunger for M.A.Smith photographs, or for the same reasons the rest of us do, because we want to? What I wrote in my post is the plain truth, and your righteous indignation doesn't change that.
    M.A. Smith, don't misunderstand me. You wrote " He said that we were saving Azo 'to fund his own use of his favorite material.' That is simply not true. I took it as a slur and an insult, which I believe it is." It's not a slur, or an insult, and it's not what I said. I never said you were saving Azo, I said that you were soliciting orders for a product that you carry to fund your own use of same. Perhaps the word guarantee would be more appropriate than fund, if your profits are as meager as you claim, and I have no reason to doubt that they are. I stand by my post, and believe it to be accurate, and in no way insulting or nasty or any of the other terms applied to it by those who disagree whith its contents. Good luck with your Azo, but if its fate is sealed and it passes into history alongside the venerable Super XX, I'm sure Jorge would be more than happy to show you a beautiful alternative.
    Sincerely (really, I mean it),
    Jay De Fehr
     
  34. Jay, I'm not questioning your English - just the use to which you decided to put it on this occasion. Just because both are contact processes does not make them alternatives: by that logic any of the alt-processes are alternatives of each other and contact printing on normal enlarging paper is an alternative to Pt/Pd - clearly not the case in terms of image appearance, which is surely the criteria. As for why I questioned your sincerity: you can not slag someone off and then wish them the best of luck; it sounds more than a little disingenuous. I do not use either Azo or Platinum processes, nor have I had any contact with Michael Smith in any other respect, so I have no axe to grind here.
     
  35. Thanks, Jorge.

    Okay, one more time and this is the end, I hope.

    This fellow Jay has some sort of axe to grind here. Is he
    resentful that I got Super XX for myself and for Paula? That I
    called Kodak and after lots of time and arguments got them to
    reserve it for me and Paula? That I sacrificed and spent five
    years paying off visa cards to do it? And that no one else was
    willing to make those kinds of commitments or sacrifices?

    Super XX: Why did Paula and I not do the same thing for Super
    XX as we are doing for AZO? Well, I would have, but it was
    discontinued forever. There was no hope to save it, even if I
    spent, literally, more money than I had earned in my total lifetime
    to that date in 1994.

    Super XX was discontinued for several reasons: it was more
    difficult to make than other films. It had ingredients that were
    found in no other films that were increasingly expensive and
    difficult for Kodak to get. (In 1994 one sheet of 8x10 cost me
    $4.75--it was much more expensive than other films.) And then
    came the kicker. Even if everyone who used Super XX had come
    up with vast sums of money Kodak would not have continued to
    make the film. They were changing their computer system for
    film making and to incorporate Super XX, with its different things
    in it, into the system, was prohibitive. At least that is what they
    told me at the time.

    With Azo, it is a different story. They still retained the capacity to
    make Grade 2, so the product was still "in the computer."

    Got it, Jay? It would behoove you not to post nasty things like you
    just did and suggest things that simply are not true did unless
    you knew what the facts were. An apology is in order here.

    Why did this discussion get started in this direction? Here is my
    guess. Unfortunately, about a year or more ago, Jay and I had a
    dispute on another forum. In answer to a question of his about
    Azo all I did was direct him to the Azo Forum on our web site and
    told him that I hoped he would get his Azo from us. I did not
    answer his question. (The answer to his question was there at
    length on the Azo Forum. I had answered it before, or had
    answered a very similar question, and was getting tired of
    repeating myself.) I also suggested he get Azo from us. He
    mistook my brusque comment about buying Azo from us as only
    caring about selling Azo and not being helpful in answer to his
    questions. (He did not know that I had spent hundreds and
    hundreds of hours on the Internet answering questions and
    helping those who knew less than I did in those areas where I
    have some expertise.) Jorge rose to his defense. At the time of
    my posting, our ability to continue to fund our huge Azo
    purchases was questionable, and yes, I took every opportunity to
    try to get others to buy it from us. There was a long and
    acrimonious discussion (that makes this one feel like a walk in
    the park), and eventually I apologized for my original brusque
    response, which was indeed brusque. At the moment of my
    posting I was in a hurry about something and did not have the
    time to give a proper answer, especially in light of the fact that I
    had already given it elsewhere. I thought it had dropped (it had
    for me), and was over, but obviously Jay is still carrying around a
    chip on his shoulder.

    Michael A. Smith
     
  36. Hi again Michael. It seems like every time you use this or another non-commercial forum to solicit business it ends up in this kind of a debate. I point out the obvious, then you and your defenders accuse me of all manner of atrocities and demand an appology. Here's the thing you've never addressed, even though you claim that it's so offensive and inaccurate. Why don't you run your Azo business as a non-profit? That's what most other evangelical organizations do. If keeping Azo in production for the good of the photographic community is truly your intention and motivation, why not spare us the martyr act and participate in a cooperative in which ALL users of Azo who are so inclined might share in the price reductions and availability made possible by volume purchasing. It's a simple concept with a proven track record, and you already have the infrastructure and community of users in place. Your current business model is identical to a small-time drug dealer; create a demand, control the supply and take product as payment. Also a simple concept with a proven track record, but drug dealers don't claim altruism. As for your purchase of Kodak's remaining stock of Super XX for your personal use, I couldn't possibly care less. I'd never even heard of it until I read your description of hoarding it and saw your photograph of yourself standing in front of a room, or cooler, or whatever, full of the stuff. I just find it remarkably illustrative of your current strategy regarding Azo. Got it Michael?
     
  37. I don't believe this, but sorry, I cannot let it pass. In general,
    people tend to believe what they read and hear, and although at
    this point I think it is pretty obvious to everyone that Jay has some
    kind of vendetta going here, I learned a long time ago that one
    ignores accusations and misrepresentations at one's own peril.
    And so I respond.

    What is it with you, Jay? That chip on your shoulder is mighty
    large. At this point, however, I am not sure what you are resentful
    about, but resentful you surely are.

    Once more (and I am sorry this basically repeats what I have
    said already, but this fellow appears to be thick and needs
    things spelled out in even more detail than I have already
    spelled them out), essentially, the Azo "business" is already a
    not-for profit. There is so little cash profit, that as I said earlier, if I
    thought this were a business I should have my head examined. I
    cannot understand why you cannot understand that. Any cash
    profit we make does not begin to begin to cover our time.
    Not-for-profit institutions pay salaries to those that run them. If
    we took salaries from this, the Azo "business" would have been
    dead after the first year. That we are starting year three is due to
    my contribution of time and energy. Maybe your time and energy
    are not worth anything, but mine is. And I contribute it (got it,
    CONTRIBUTE it) so that others can have this paper available to
    them. If our prices are a little higher than some places' prices,
    and they are (and they are lower than others), that is because the
    other places already have people in position who are working on
    exactly this kind of thing--buying and selling products and their
    salaries are already covered. One example of my contribution: it
    took a lot of time and effort just to convince Kodak to keep this
    paper in the product mix. Others who sell Azo don't spend their
    time that way. No, you don't think of things like that. All you can
    see is, "well, a box cost him "x" and he is selling it for "x" plus "y"
    so he is making a profit. It seems you have about zero
    understanding of how any organization or business operates.

    Your likening me to a drug dealer is repulsive. The hundred
    dollars a year we save on our own Azo use--remember we don't
    get it for free--we only gain the difference between our cost and
    our selling price, and that difference is very, very little--is
    inconsequential.

    And then you flat out contradict yourself and lie. "As for your
    purchase of Kodak's remaining stock of Super XX for your
    personal use, I couldn't possibly care less." You do care about
    our purchase of Super XX or you would not have brought it up in
    the first place.

    And forget the apology I asked for earlier. At this point I know it
    wouldn't be sincere even if you were decent enough to offer it.
    Enough already.

    Michael A. Smith
     
  38. The policy of this forum as outlined from inception by Q.T. Luong

    Do NOT:
    * Ask questions unrelated to LF photography.
    * Post classifieds (for sale or wanted adds).
    * Make personal attacks.

    Apparently we have some who refuse to abide. Might I mention that the
    Classifieds area in Photonet is WHERE WE POST OUR FOR SALE ADS. To
    that end I suggest that this thread be deleted and this nonsense put to rest.
     
  39. Sounds like Jay needs to go fly-fishing with his friend.
     

Share This Page