Azo status

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

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!

Platinum is looking better all the time. Good luck with your order.

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

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.

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

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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

"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,

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.

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.

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.

"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".

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.

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.

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

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

Michael, would you fill an empty 8x10 box with 25 sheets if I mailed it to you?

<i>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><p>

 

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.<p>

 

<i>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. </i><p>

 

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.<p>

 

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.<p>

 

<i>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><p>

 

This is <b>your</b> 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.<p>

 

<i>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><p>

 

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 <b>is</b> 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.<p>

 

<i>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><p>

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

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?

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

 

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??