Replacement paper for Azo

[jd callow]

Donald et al, we all know how to check an individual's old posts. I'll leave those who care to, to do it on their own.

 

[Donald Miller]

Donald et al, we all know how to check an individual's old posts. I'll leave those who care to, to do it on their own.

John,

Which posts of mine are you alluding to?

 

[sanking]

Just to get a few more facts straight, from my understanding of personal exchanges Jay has a much greater ax to grind on this than Donald. You might need to go to the archives of the AZO forum to fully understand the issues.

But I agree in that folks here are smart and responsible enough to figure out on their own the pros and cons on the wisdom of purchasing the replacement AZO product. I for sure don't need any help in figuring this out.

Sandy

Just to get a few facts straight.

Donald, based upon previous posts you have an axe to grind.

Jay, I honestly believe it wouldn't matter if it was M&P or someone else. You would respond in a similar manner.

Everyone here is pretty smart and responsible. I'll bet they can figure out the pros and cons all by themselves.

 

[Donald Miller]

Just to get a few more facts straight, from my understanding of personal exchanges Jay has a much greater ax to grind on this than Donald. You might need to go to the archives of the AZO forum to fully understand the issues.

But I agree in that folks here are smart and responsible enough to figure out on their own the pros and cons on the wisdom of purchasing the replacement AZO product. I for sure don't need any help in figuring this out.

Sandy

Sandy,

You are absolutely correct in that I have no ill will toward either Michael Smith or Paula Chamlee. In fact they have spent time in my home. I am sincere in stating that I wish them the greatest good fortune in this venture.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Is it possible for the name Michael A. Smith to be mentioned in a forum without Jay starting a fight?

 

[Michael A. Smith]

Paula and I are now teaching a workshop. All day. And beyond. I have not had time to get back to this Forum and those who say my response on the Azo Forum can readily see it is brief.

Paula and I, through the sale of our Azo Portfolio, will be putting up FAR more money for this than anyone else, or more precisely, more than everyone else combined.

A test run will be made on the coating machines. We will pay for this ourselves. No one else’s money will be used. If anyone bothered to read my announcement carefully they would have seen that we stated that no checks would be deposited and no credit cards would be charged until we needed final payment to get the paper. Hence, no one is at the slightest risk but us.

If the test run is not up to our standards we will either not go forward with this suppler and will try to find another or, preferably, we will ask them to make improvements.

Those who have actually seen our prints, as opposed to seeing web images know well that we do not compromise our print quality and will not accept a substandard product.

Yes, we are asking people to make a substantial commitment to commit to buy significant quantities of paper in advance. It is the only way we will know that when the time comes we will be able to pay for the paper. If everyone buys a box or two of 100-sheets each, we will not raise the necessary funds and this whole venture will end right now until we are able to come up with all of the money ourselves. Which we will at some point.

By the way, if anyone thinks we are doing this as a moneymaking venture, we will happily give them (not sell to them) the entire business and they can put up the money and do it themselves. All they have to do is make the same commitment we are making. Are there any takers out there?

No more time to answer.

Where is that other thread someone mentioned where this is discussed?

Cannot promise to get back here for a few days.

 

[Mike Lopez]

"If anyone bothered to read my announcement carefully they would have seen that we stated that no checks would be deposited and no credit cards would be charged until we needed final payment to get the paper."

Michael, you hope for too much, it would seem.

 

[Mark Layne]

I am with JandC, Daniel, Aggie and Nathan on this.

If you want to try the paper, do so.

If you want to wait, do so.

If you never plan to buy anything from Michael because you have a personal grudge with him, just admit it and avoid the blatant dishonesty.

But if you are here to simply criticize Michael Smith, shove it or take it to the Soap Box. This forum does not need any more hypocrisy in the general forums.

Sandy

Well said. Lets face it 84.00 a box is not far off the price of store bought paper. If the guy really wanted to make money he would be charging 200.00 a box and those who need it would buy it.
Any dealings I've ever had with Michael have been cordial. I'm sure that if he didn't exist neither would chloride paper by now,good or bad-and few here would know what it was.
Mark

 

[Eric Jones]

It's quite commendable what some people (i.e.: MAS and M. Kidillak) take on to ensure theirs as well as others access to long loved or newly needed materials. Others have put together other deals (i.e.: Bulk Amidol, etc.) with success. I wonder if some transparency, both financial and technical, in the whole process would help everyone achieve their goals. How much of a financial commitment is needed? If one or two boxes here and there won't cut it, how many will? Any sensitometric data on the hand coated batch that could put people at a little ease? Or perhaps some scans of some tests, although we are all aware that they wont mean much other than to allay some reservations. Just some thoughts from someone that is interested but lack of details leave concern.

 

[Jim Chinn]

As I stated in a different post on this subject I can't afford to buy a large quantity of paper at this time, but will take a "leap of faith" and buy a box. I suppose the worst that can happen is I get a box of paper that does not fit my expectations so I am out that money. God knows I have spent far more money on paper, film, gear and chemistry over the years that I did not like. So in the long run the money is not an issue and I have faith that if the paper gets made it will be good.

If there was a pre-production sampling produced and used by several individuals who could vouch for the quality of the paper, I think a lot of people would be willing to buy larger quantities. But that is not in the cards with this venture, so we need to make due.

A little suggestion for Michael Smith if he keeps viewing this post. Maybe you could provide the same price or discount on the next purchase for those who do support the effort with a current purchase?

 

[James Bleifus]

Is it possible for the name Michael A. Smith to be mentioned in a forum without Jay starting a fight?

History says no.

Cheers, James

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

It is obvious to ME that Michael and Paula are not working so hard on an AZO replacement to get rich. They are doing it because they love the quality of silver chloride paper and hope to continue to use it. All who use or hope to use silver chloride paper in the future stand to benifit. If you want to participate, great. If you have questions and can ask them in a reasonable manner, great. If you don't desire to be involved, don't. Instead so many take a hostile stand immediately. This behavior is truly absurd. I've read enough posts to know that it doesn't matter WHAT Michael may post, people are going to bitch.

If I were MAS I would NEVER post here. The disrespect, no, plain insolent treatment he is so regularly shown is appalling. For the most part this community is filled with good hearted people who share a common interest, but like any other community it has it's fair share of as*holes. I really don't give a sh*t what negative comments follow this post. I won't waste my time reading them. I'm going to be too busy making photographs to read another word of the BS to which this thread has so predictably degraded.

Good luck Michael and Paula, and thank you. Shawn Dougherty

 

[MattCarey]

I personally can't see where the purchase of one or two boxes of paper by each of us will save this venture. But I damn sure am going to buy all of it I can afford on my fixed income. Thanks Michael and Paula for giving us a chance!

Charlie.............................

Hey Charlie--

If you really want some--I'll buy you a box (of 100sheets 8x10) if you will make me an image (either with it or with another method)!

Matt

(p.s. This is a serious offer Charlie--I really like your images. PM me if interested as I am about to render this thread "ignored")

 

[Michael Kadillak]

As LF photographers we have to accept the cold hard reality that in the transition to the new age of photography some companies are opting out of the infrastructural costs of making certain products available to us for reasons that are immaterial. We can either point fingers and be bitter as a few participants seem primed to rise to the occasion and go for the Gold Medal OR we can take the matter into our own hands and make something productive happen.

Fact - Michael and Paula traveled a long way on their dime to inspect the facilities and personally meet with the company that can produce this product (yes, they have experience making this paper as they have made it years ago). A financial incentive is the only way to encourage the company to allocate run time to a sensitized paper product that they were not expecting to produce.

As a result, either get on the train and be thankful for the opportunity or go home. We do not need your negativity masked as "concerns" at this critical juncture.

Thanks God that there are a number of highly successful and productive people that are ready willing and able to share some of their business and entrepreunerial skills to keep us on track with film and paper through this transition. I hope that we overcome these bumps in the road with sheet film and the new Azo and demonstrate to other companies that this is a viable long term market for them to participate in. But a positive attitude and participation in making it happen is the only real solution. Grab the checkbook and be thankful that we have been graced with a marvelous opportunity. Silver chloride papers lasting properties are well known so STOCK UP!

Where there is a will, there is a way!

Onward

 

[Jorge]

As a result, either get on the train and be thankful for the opportunity or go home. We do not need your negativity masked as "concerns" at this critical juncture.

Sorry, but this is a public forum and my or anybody else's "negativity" has as much right to be expressed as your hero worship. This is not the MAS fan club and I certainly do not need you to tell me what I need to be thankful for or not.

You want to throw your money away, fine! but dont tell me I need to do the same or I am a "negative" person.

 

[kenmeyersphoto]

What I want to know is why do the naysayers want to kill the Azo replacement? Why are they trying to put seeds of doubt into people minds? If you aren't into Azo or you are not interested in a replacement for Azo, that is fine. Give it a rest. Go spread your vitriol someplace else.

 

[Donald Miller]

What I want to know is why do the naysayers want to kill the Azo replacement? Why are they trying to put seeds of doubt into people minds? If you aren't into Azo or you are not interested in a replacement for Azo, that is fine. Give it a rest. Go spread your vitriol someplace else.

I don't view what has been said by anyone to this point as being naysayers. What has been stated by all who have responded has been varied. Those who have questioned this have posed valid questions. These valid questions seem to balance out those who want the replacement paper to come into production regardless of a lack of an awareness of the qualities and costs involved. I certainly have not observed any spreading of vitriol by anyone to this point. There has been no spreading of bitterly abusive feeling or expression that the choice of that term would indicate.

I think that considering no densitometric analysis of the proposed paper having been or being provided, no clearly defined financial costs or requirements having been indicated, and the only attributes and financial requirements being put forth are noticeably vague and indicated by one individual makes this a questionable matter from where I sit. I would have the same concerns and questions even if we were talking about "widgits" rather then a photographic paper as we are in this case.

I am sorry that there are those who find that reasonable people raising reasonable questions are being bothersome to the matter at hand.

Let's face it, Michael Smith, who I like as a person, clearly stated in his last post to this thread that a lot of people buying one or two boxes of paper were not going to be sufficient to see this come to fruition. In other words Michael needs some "heavy lifters". These are people who are willing to pony up to the tune of a $5,000 or $10,000 commitment. I don't know about you, but for me that is one hell of a lot of paper.

For those who are willing to make this commitment, I applaud you for the strength of your convictions. I applaud Michael Smith for his desire to accomplish this. I wish all the very best outcome in this matter.

I am not in a financial position to ante up that much money now. I have a lot of friends who apparently share my position on this. I am not sure that I would do so if I had the money to spend in this manner based on what has been indicated to this point.

 

[avandesande]

shows a blatant lack of understanding of emulsion making and coating. There is absolutely no way that anyone can estimate the keeping properties of a paper that doesn't exist.

Come on Jay, do you really think a chloride emulsion is that different from a chlorbromide emulsion? How about a variable contrast paper? If anything it should be easier and surer to make. "Absolutely no Way" is a bit of an exaggeration, don't you think?

 

[Alex Hawley]

Alex, if there was anything in any of my posts that could be even wildly misconstrued as hostile, you might have a point, but there isn't.

Jay, did you miss your calling as a lawyer or do you practice law in addition to photography? That's a quite good defense statement.

My point is and has been that the paper we're all talking about is a fictitious one. It has not been tested, because it doesn't exist, therefore, any statements about the properties of the paper are pure fantasy. It is worth noting that no one has challenged these facts.

Fact is Jay, the paper has been under test for some time. This has been stated by an APUG member in these forums who has been testing it independently of MAS's testing program. My memory is not sharp enough to recall the exact thread but its here. You may have missed those discussions.

shows a blatant lack of understanding of emulsion making and coating.

Please enlighten us Jay. I'm a technical-type person, having been a degreed engineer for thirty years now so I feel I can understand it, but I don't have much of a clue about it.

Please give us a detailed description of the coating process, starting from the assemblage of raw materials to final storage of the master roll. Please include all tolerances to the specifications and what effect variations from specifications have on the paper in terms of speed, tone, contrast, and longevity. I am particularly interested in how the light sensitive emulsion is protected from light all through the process.

Here's another question along those lines. Its well known and established that Kodak made some deviations from specification on the the last two master rolls of Azo. Grade 3 came out significantly slower in speed than it had been. Grade 2 came out significantly softer than it had been. What deviations would have caused these effects? How will they affect the paper's longevity? Were we all mislead on something related to these changes?

Thanks in advance for taking the time to explain all this Jay. I can appreciate the hard work.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Some of the recent group film purchases involved films that I don't particularly like, but I'm glad for the people who like them, and their purchase of those films generally benefits the whole LF and ULF enterprise, because it means there will be people working in those formats, constituting a market for supplies and equipment.

I could have started ranting about what lousy film choices people were making, and why they should choose the film that I like instead of the film that they like on aesthetic, technical, and business grounds, but what good would that do? I can find the film that I like another way, vote with my dollars, keep my opinions about other folks' taste in film to myself, and if their group purchase succeeds, then I benefit from it, even if I am not a direct participant.

 

[jd callow]

I see this as a good thing for all of us.

I don't see the controversy in what MAS is doing. I think David stated it pretty well; If it goes south he and those on the thread might pay a couple hundred dollars for inferior paper, but MAS loses a lot more. Meanwhile I am very doubtful that anyone who invests/purchases a large quantity (say 10k) is not going to involve themselves. If they do put up 10k and sit idly by then they have themselves to blame if it goes south.

If it turn out to be good paper the results will have far exceeded the risk. It will also signal the potential for other traditional product manufacturing possibilities.

From where I sit the concerns stated don't seem to hit the mark or are over stated.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Alex, I hesitate to step in here and raise either expectations or dash them through my knowledge of the making and coating process. I can only point out several facts. These are not intended to be negative per se, but merely are intended to counterbalance your comments above. I continue below with the positive....

1. Kodak failed in making the last batches of Azo properly. If they can, what might happen elsewhere going directly from hand coatings to full width machine coatings?

2. The company chosen by M&P is stated to be reluctant to make this paper in the summer. How extraordinary. Kodak makes paper in the summer and so do Ilford, Fuji and etc. Why is this so? Is something wrong with the environmental controls at the plant or is there a problem with the formula? Is this even a problem? IDK.

3. I make AgCl emulsions and hand coat them. They are easy to make, but not easy to dope and doctor! This is why Kodak's last batches came out wrong. Besides, Azo is not a pure chloride emulsion as can be shown from a wedge spectrogram of the paper. Will a work-alike duplicate it fully? IDK.

4. I can make an Azo type paper that looks perfect compared with a 4" contact exposure of Azo to one light source. Projecting latent image keeping and reciprocity failure from that to all conditions is dangerous unless one actually does the tests, assuming one knows how to do them and interpret the results properly. Add in raw stock keeping to that and the number of variables becomes astronomical, so it is reasonable for anyone (Jay included) to question whether all of these types of responses will be the same in the new paper to the old Azo. Whether those responses are important or not isn't for me to judge. I'm just making an observation, based on the fact that my Azo AgCl has very bad contrast reciprocity failure.

That said, I believe that a company that has made an Azo type paper in the past has a good chance of making it again in the future, and the results should be very good with a reasonable price tag. I applaud Michael and Paula and wish them every success with a minimum of drain on their finances. I think that they are taking a route that will benefit the LF photographers, and I think both sides here have raised valid points in a fairly reasonable manner.

If anyone can test and put a stamp of approval on an Azo replacement it is Michael and Paula and those they designate. I would place my trust in them regarding this but I would reserve judgement for the final full width machine coating to give a stamp of approval to balance out all possible eventualities.

Those that wish to participate will benfit from an Azo work-alike that may repeat Azo paper exactly or be very close, and those that don't participate will have a chance to buy into it later on with a slight premium in price.

Michael and Paula will benefit in reputation and in stature as benefactors of our hobby. They already have our respect as outstanding photographers. I think everyone here deserves kudos for being forthright in their feelings and holding their temper (pretty much), and we should all give Michael and Paula a warm well done (so far). And at their own expense.

Given the finances and time, this will eventually work.

To M&P, keep up the good work.

PE

 

[Donald Miller]

What follows is not intended as any value judgement of anything. It is a report on the factual nature of this matter from the standpoint of ownership of product and the impact on individual investors in the matter. This comes from my education and my experience having funded, started up, and operated several business ventures.

I have been giving the matter of Michael Smith and his desire to provide an Azo replacement some thought. In what follows, I have approached this primarily from a fiscal analysis.

I think that it is important for those who wish to become involved, as investors, to be aware of a couple of things. The first is that under the proposal that Michael has put forth, he assumes the position of both a photographic paper manufacturer and dealer or distributor. Under the terms of his arrangement with the actual manufacturer, the ownership of the finished product will be owned by Michael Smith, his heirs, and/or his assignees. The actual physical manufacturer in this case is acting in the capacity of consultant and assembler of raw component materials into a finished product. They may store or house the finished product for Michael. They will retain no legal financial position in the ownership of the finished product.

This is at departure from a manufacturer such as Kodak or Ilford where the actual manufacturer would retain title to the finished product.

From what Michael has indicated, it becomes apparent that the assembler/consultant will not move forward to producing and delivering a finished product until such time that the cost for this service and materials has been paid. That is why he is asking for large financial contributions to fund this.

This means that there will be two master rolls of paper that will be prepared for future sales and distribution by Michael Smith, his heirs, and/or his assignees. The effect for those who contribute is that in essence they are paying for this product more then once...or so it would appear.

It is important to recognize one important factor for those who consider that finished product is exchanged for financial investment. Tha is that the value of the finished product is a value that is assigned by Michael and that it has very little or nothing to do with cost of manufacturing said product. A more equitable investor position, considering that the requested investment is for start up purposes, would be to exchange the financial investment for finished goods at cost and not at retail value.

There is another way in which this matter could be resolved and this is a way more typically used for business start up funding. This is the manner that is most usually used because investors require it before investing and because it is more equitable to all parties concerned.

The alternative way is to form a cooperative venture. A corporation, in other words. In that arrangement, the investors would own an ownership position in the company...in this case that would be the finished product. This ownership position would be represented either as financial value or product market share. In other words, the investors would own actual hard assets as opposed to the arrangement that is being proposed wherein the hard assets remain the property of Michael Smith, his heirs, and/or his assignees.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Excellent points PE. No expectations raised or dashed.

If I was a billionaire, or even a high-end millionaire, I would underwrite this paper develoment in its entirety. That's the level of help they need. Too bad people with that much money throw it at politicians rather than the arts. Let's don't follow that thought any further.

 

[James Bleifus]

They will retain no legal financial position in the ownership of the finished product.
[SNIP]
The alternative way is to form a cooperative venture. A corporation, in other words. In that arrangement, the investors would own an ownership position in the company...

Donald, Michael has made it even easier for you. He's said in another post that anyone who wants to take over can have this whole enterprise for FREE. Send him an email. You can have the whole thing for yourself and worry about the money, finger pointing, etc.

Cheers, James