Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Wierd Print Bureau Experience  (Read 14895 times)
tgphoto
Guest
« Reply #60 on: December 28, 2007, 03:59:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So, who are you and what creds do YOU bring to the party? You don't have a personal profile or link to an atelier service, so I guess we're just supposed to believe your words?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Amazing what you can find on Google these days...

[a href=\"http://www.deanimaging.com/]http://www.deanimaging.com/[/url]
« Last Edit: December 28, 2007, 03:59:29 PM by tgphoto » Logged
TylerB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 345


WWW
« Reply #61 on: December 28, 2007, 10:29:42 PM »
ReplyReply

This thread seemed to take off in a few directions after my initial reply to John, and due to family and holiday issues I have not had a chance to jump back in.
First of all, John, after reading your other posts, you know what you need and it seems to require an output profile from your provider, and you'll be done. I have no argument with that at all. I merely initially tried to chime in that some printers may not give them out for a variety of reasons, and they shouldn't be judged as printers because of that policy alone, they may just not be your printer if that's your priority. Done with that.

In that same post I said this business has become brutal, and I choose protect myself from that to some degree, what followed proved my point better than anything I could have offered.
After stating I do not have a policy of handing out my output profiles, the immediate reply was a major player in this industry telling people to leave their printer if they do not provide profiles. The implication then, that my clients should leave me, is certainly no leap, and was not taken lightly.

Every printer that posted to this thread, and I know some of them, no doubt uses soft proofing and know it's value. Because we are involved in this work daily, we also know it's limitations. In some situations I have provided a profile to the artists, few have asked, few have calibrated monitors, I even go to them and calibrate theirs sometimes. We all do what we need to do to make the best possible prints for our artists.
Some work their file, what they see on the monitor is what they want, and simply want it reproduced. Others, like myself and the other printers I know here, are totally into the materials and are primarily concerned with the finished object, a paradigm carried down from the fine silver print, platinum, etc., traditions we took to heart. The soft proof got us to our first physical object, now we have new concerns. The first print, aided by softproofing, is not a "surprise", it might even be a final. Everything Walker said was on the mark.

Here's a good one-
"The profile is the key in showing you what the service provider is supposed to give you. If they can't calibrate and profile their devices (or are too lazy), you've got bigger problems here than what is being used as an excuse for not providing profile."

Nice, no one suggested anything of the kind.
My friend John, no doubt sensitive to the implied threat above, came out swinging. Then the tag teaming began. John does not find the forums to be the place to make known who he is and what he does at every turn, it's a place to exchange information and ideas, not promote. That some of us have better things to so than spend time on the internet filling in nice little profiles and myspaces does not make us anonymous or without "creds".
Bud.
John has been "around here" in the printmaking community for a very very long time and is highly respected. He's just not shouting his name and accomplishments every chance he gets.
He is also one of maybe ten people in the country I would give a crap about what he thinks of my prints.

""We could just all download perfectly engineered ones from Epson's website couldn't we, and it would one big happy world.
"For Epson profiles, that's IS the case!..."
...
"with the choice of Sommerset Velvet, Ultrasmooth Fine Art, Luster or the new Exhibition Fiber Paper (EFP), I personally see no need to use any non-Epson papers anyway..."

Are ya getting it yet? Need to be any more transparent?

I've gotten myself in trouble on lists in the past with the occasional rant, posted while a bit too hot under the collar, but it's been a few days and I still feel like saying this and I'll no doubt pay. I've had the immense pleasure of meeting and learning from severel truly gifted masterful amazing people in the photographic community over the years. They were for the most part, intelligent, generous, demanding, and uplifting teachers.
This brand pounding, belligerent condescension certain falls far below the mark.

Sorry for the length. A lot of this is about having the last words, and I expect they will not be in short supply.
Excuse me while I go talk to my clients.
Tyler
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #62 on: December 28, 2007, 11:38:52 PM »
ReplyReply

That's great.  You know who he is and that he has achieved some form of success.  But for every one else his anonymity means that his words have as much weight as mine.  (At least in regards to the tactile.  Abstract arguments work fine anonymous or not.)

Edit: It should be noted that his credentials appear to have been established by the end of this thread.  I'm referring to earlier in the thread.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2007, 11:40:28 PM by DarkPenguin » Logged
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #63 on: December 28, 2007, 11:40:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you Tyler, and for that matter *everyone* else!  Obviously, feelings and workflows, are in abundance here!   Brutal?  Thats why I write software for a living - it's slightly less so (I think) . . .

I can fully understand the challenges faced by a lab in today's environment - especially experienced digital labs that have developed relationships with alternative inks and materials.  The challenge of some "picky" soul coming in touting that he is "color mangled" would make *me* tend to cringe in fear - after all it is not your jobs to teach such techniques . . . .

In my particular case, I've been dealing with this lab for nearly 20 years - they *know* who I am, and have sold me film, darkroon chemicals, photo paper, etc.  I support them because they are the only medium format E6 process lab within 100 miles of my location and they do a damn fine job.  When I found out they had aquired an Epson 11180, I was very excited about the possibilities, after my attempted conversation and resultant lecture, I tend to agree with Jeff, they don't support a color managed workflow and/or don't know what they are doing,  - which is too bad for them, and me.  I had hoped for a more forthcoming response and respect a 20 year customer deserves.

After years of B&W photgraphy with Ansel Adam's classic series; The Camera, The Negative and The Print essentially defining my workflow, I feel the Luminous Landscape and it's presenters & participants have been instrumental in pointing me toward an alternative, equally rigorous *digital* workflow.  Bill Atkinson is an absolute hero of mine in the software development sense, his applications and UI's (user interface) taught the world what a mouse is and is capable of.  When I saw him on LLV introducing the concepts of color mangement, I realized that consistent results across a variety of devices is not only possible, it is repeatedly so.

Obviously, there alternative methods that have been described, as well as possible pitfalls and even some pointed technical comment on the image I supplied - please understand that all of your comments are *much* appreciated,  I feel I'm in a much better position to choose a digital lab for all large prints because of it!

Happy New Year - John

Quick follow-up;  I still have not received the promised profile from the shop despite having paid a $6 "research fee".
« Last Edit: December 29, 2007, 12:21:06 AM by Joh.Murray » Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5421


WWW
« Reply #64 on: December 28, 2007, 11:43:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
"with the choice of Sommerset Velvet, Ultrasmooth Fine Art, Luster or the new Exhibition Fiber Paper (EFP), I personally see no need to use any non-Epson papers anyway..."

Are ya getting it yet? Need to be any more transparent?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=163730\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


If you are implying that my choice of paper has anything to do with the fact that I have a relationship with Epson, then you are wrong...I can use ANY paper made...the fact that I choose to use those 4 Epson papers is the result of tests and the desire to use the best paper for my purposes–period.

I have two "standard" papers...Sommerset Velvet for watercolor and generally in the 505 gram 24"x30" size. When I want to print smaller and on watercolor I tend to use Ultrasmooth because with smaller prints, I don't want the higher degree of texture. But, I don't like the too texture of Ultrasmooth printing larger.

For high dynamic range prints, I have, in the past used Luster (also generally 24"x30") but having tested (and been involved testing internally) EFP, I'm planning on switching most of prints over to EFP.

I also don't see the need to using anything other than the standard Epson inks because I can get both large gamut pigment prints in both color and B&W from the same printer. I don't see the need to go to alternative inks sets to get good neutral B&W.

As a result, I don't use a lot of different paper types and I'm using standard Epson ink, so, I have found absolutely no reason to redo the work that Epson has already done on the SP profiles because I found that I couldn't make any better profiles. Epson used the X-Rite I1 iSis with Profiler, which is the same equipment I have access to (although I generally use ProfileMaker instead of Profiler).

So, when I soft proof using the Epson SP profiles on the limited range of papers I use, I've found soft proofing very useful and predictive of the final print. The choice of papers and the use of the Epson SP profiles has nothing to do with any relationship with Epson...

And, the OP wasn't talking about asking for custom made profiles from the service bureau...they were using the standard driver installed profiles that ANYBODY can download and install even if they don't have a printer.

The fact that what's his name chooses to post anonymously while making belligerent statements without backing them up means to me, he is merely making statements without any credibility and there's enough of that already out there on the net.

And Tyler? You pretty much fall in the same category...I don't know you from Adam either.
Logged
dkeyes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 259


WWW
« Reply #65 on: December 29, 2007, 12:38:51 AM »
ReplyReply

John,
I have an idea. Why don't you take your work to be printed by Tyler B.? He's in Seattle and is one of the best printers in the NW if not the West Coast. He may or may not supply you with a profile but either way, I'm sure you'll get the print your looking for. Softproof or not, you have to do a test print to see what your really going to get. Chances are you won't need to make changes and if you do, it will be that much easier adjusting from the proof print.
- Doug
Logged

George Barr
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #66 on: December 29, 2007, 01:07:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Having enjoyed Jeff and Michael in their 'From Camera To Print', I thought it time to revisit the idea of soft proofing, clearly they think I'm missing out by ignoring it. Guess what. They're right. Spent considerable time today editing an image to get it just perfect (on my profiled monitor). I then made a print on my 5000 using a commercial profile for epson enhanced matte (or whatever it's going to be called tomorrow). I did exactly as Jeff recommended in the video - I looked at the monitor and went oh yuk, but when I set the print 90 degrees to the monitor, normal lighting on, and flipped back and forth between the soft proof and output print - it is spot on - all the differences between the monitor image I worked so hard to get, and the output print were explained by the soft proof.

All I can say is both thanks and you have persuaded me - next I have to learn to adjust my images to compensate as best possible for the deficiencies of a given printer paper combination.



George Barr
My Webpage
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8625



WWW
« Reply #67 on: December 29, 2007, 09:51:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
First of all, John, after reading your other posts, you know what you need and it seems to require an output profile from your provider, and you'll be done. I have no argument with that at all. I merely initially tried to chime in that some printers may not give them out for a variety of reasons, and they shouldn't be judged as printers because of that policy alone, they may just not be your printer if that's your priority.

ALL of them lame excuses to make the service provider's life easier and not the customer. Its as simple as that!

Quote
After stating I do not have a policy of handing out my output profiles, the immediate reply was a major player in this industry telling people to leave their printer if they do not provide profiles.

Customer asks for profile service provider says he has but will not supply. Seems like a prefect reason to take business elsewhere!

Quote
Every printer that posted to this thread, and I know some of them, no doubt uses soft proofing and know it's value. Because we are involved in this work daily, we also know it's limitations. In some situations I have provided a profile to the artists, few have asked, few have calibrated monitors, I even go to them and calibrate theirs sometimes. We all do what we need to do to make the best possible prints for our artists.


This isn't about a few of your customers who may know what they are doing and your response. Its about a customer of someone who DOES know what he's doing, does know what he wants from the provider and the provider refuses to comply. Answer, take business elsewhere. Hopefully business owner gets a clue, provides the services customers ask for instead of coming up with lame limitations of the technology (its only 90% there) and throws the baby out with the bath water.

Quote
Here's a good one-
"The profile is the key in showing you what the service provider is supposed to give you. If they can't calibrate and profile their devices (or are too lazy), you've got bigger problems here than what is being used as an excuse for not providing profile." Nice, no one suggested anything of the kind.

I absolutely suggested it because 9 times out of 10, this is WHY a service provider will not provide a profile. You have to dig a bit deeper to find out the real reasons, but this is often it.

Quote
My friend John, no doubt sensitive to the implied threat above, came out swinging. Then the tag teaming began.

No, John came out with lame technical excuses, then those of us that know better simply provided the CORRECT technical replies based on our own work, the work of others we've taught and the work of pro's in service bureau’s that provide best practices. That you don't like the message doesn't make it a gang up on you and John. You're just in the wrong forum to be saying such nonsense to a pretty educated and savvy audience.

Quote
John does not find the forums to be the place to make known who he is and what he does at every turn, it's a place to exchange information and ideas, not promote. That some of us have better things to so than spend time on the internet filling in nice little profiles and myspaces does not make us anonymous or without "creds".

And he's welcome to come here and say anything he wants but if its way off track technically, he's going to be called on it.

Let's see, we've had soft proofing in Photoshop since 1998. This isn't something new and revolutionary that's just being tested, although based on the response of some lab owner's, you'd think otherwise.

Quote
John has been "around here" in the printmaking community for a very very long time and is highly respected.

Well by you apparently.

Quote
He's just not shouting his name and accomplishments every chance he gets.

Great and he may be the greatest printer in modern history. His ideas about soft proofing are in need of modernization. Or the way he feels about supplying profiles to customers who request em. But that's his business, he can do as he wishes. The original poster seems to know what he wants, and who he doesn't want to deal with in the lab business. As such, these posts have answered the questions asked of the members.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2007, 10:20:21 AM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Doombrain
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #68 on: January 02, 2008, 09:53:32 AM »
ReplyReply

All this over a ICC profile and soft proofing?

Happy new year?  
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #69 on: January 02, 2008, 01:57:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
All this over a ICC profile and soft proofing?

No, it's about shoddy customer service and printers not being willing to educate themselves on good color management practices, which in the majority of cases negatively impacts the quality of the finished product. The reasons given for not providing a client a copy of one's printer profie for soft-proofing are obfuscatory and misleading.

So what if some clients won't know what to do with it, or how to use it properly, or don't calibrate their monitors? That's no excuse for refusing to give it to clients who do have a clue. If you have reservations about a client's color management expertise, you offer to do a proof print, and try to educate him/her about color management best practice, not condescendingly refuse to allow one's printer profiles to be handled by the great unwashed. It's bad color management practice and an insult to the client. If you approach the client properly, you can often earn some extra money doing color management consulting, and increase your value to the client, the quality of their prints, and their satisfaction with your services.

My experience with using outside print services is that those who cannot or will not offer a print profile to their clients are either clueless about color management, print on multiple machines and don't want to deal with the complexity that can introduce to the process (AKA lazy), use canned printer profiles but are ashamed to admit this to their clients, or else dumb everything down to sRGB and limit print gamut accordingly. None of those bode well for the quality of the final print, or customer satisfaction. I will not patronize an outside print service that will not provide a print profile on request for soft-proofing and optimizing an image to a particular printer/inkset/paper combination. There's too many good quality services that will follow best color management practices to waste time with doofi.
Logged

Bruce Watson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


WWW
« Reply #70 on: January 02, 2008, 02:50:40 PM »
ReplyReply

This thread is, well, it's uncivil. I don't know why. But it is. And a lack of civility isn't called for. That's what's perplexing.

What's interesting is what we have basically three people who print for a living (Amadou, Tyler, and John) saying that there's more to life than an ICC profile. That there's more to making a great print than can be done with soft proofing on a monitor. That sometimes giving clients ICC profiles causes more trouble than it solves.

Then there's two people who do not print for a living (Jeff, Andrew) who say that if a service provider doesn't provide an ICC profile then they either don't know what they are doing or don't provide a good service to their customers.

What makes this ironic is that each of these five people are "industry experts." Amadou, Tyler, and John have forgotten more about fine art printing (a lot more) than most of us will ever learn. Jeff has forgotten more about Photoshop (a lot more) than most of us will ever learn. Andrew has forgotten a lot more about color management than most of us will ever learn.

Each of these people is correct in their own way. So what's up with the shouting boys? You're acting like little kids. Mine! Stop it! I'm right and you're wrong!

What it comes down to is that each of us have different talents, abilities, experience, and vision. Some of us need to have as much control over the process as we can get. Some prefer a collaborative relationship with a print maker.

Those who need the control need a service provider who will basically rent the equipment to them -- provide the ICC profile, let the customer make all adjustments, and just print the file as is from the customer.

Those who want a collaborative relationship typically seek a provider with more printmaking expertise. They recognize that people who make prints day in and day out are likely to know a thing or two that they (the artist) doesn't know and that the expertise offered can perhaps make a better print. It takes a while to establish a trusting relationship between artist and print maker, that's true. But once a collaborative partnership is established it's possible to get better prints faster by exchanging proof prints.

The bottom line is, each of us has to find a service provider that can provide him/her with a level of comfort that makes doing business possible. Because if you aren't comfortable it's really difficult to make good art. And that's what all this is supposed to be about isn't it? The art.

If it's me, and I've got the cash to be making prints bigger than I can make with my desktop printer, and I can get someone of the caliber of a Tyler Boley, John Dean, or Amadou Diallo to make a print for me, I wouldn't hesitate to work with them any way they want.

Nor would I hesitate to learn Photoshop from Jeff Schewe, or color management from Andrew Rodney, taught anyway they want.

But when I print from my local prolab's LightJet I want their ICC profile. Because they aren't offering anything beyond renting me time and running the equipment and therefore I have to make all the adjustments myself. Which usually costs me a couple of proof prints.  

Now... How about we start the new year off with a more civil tone, shall we?
Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5421


WWW
« Reply #71 on: January 02, 2008, 03:25:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Then there's two people who do not print for a living (Jeff, Andrew) who say that if a service provider doesn't provide an ICC profile then they either don't know what they are doing or don't provide a good service to their customers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164638\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Uh huh...well, I don't print other people's images for a living...that's true. But I do print _MY_ images for a living and with the exception of once a year where I have Nash Editions do my prints for Epson's Photo Expo gallery, I do consider myself a professional printer. I also teach fine art printing in classes and workshops, so you would do well to be careful how you try to pigeon hole people around here.

Quote
Now... How about we start the new year off with a more civil tone, shall we?

My tone reflects the tone and voice of the posts I answer...post civil and I'll be civil. Post like and a$$hole and I'l respond in kind–sorry, I'm not predisposed to turn the other cheek.
Logged
Bruce Watson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


WWW
« Reply #72 on: January 02, 2008, 04:22:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My tone reflects the tone and voice of the posts I answer...post civil and I'll be civil. Post like and a$$hole and I'l respond in kind–sorry, I'm not predisposed to turn the other cheek.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164647\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Each of us is responsible for our own behavior. Blaming our behavior on others is childish.
Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5421


WWW
« Reply #73 on: January 02, 2008, 04:30:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Blaming our behavior on others is childish.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164659\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm childish...always have been, always will be...and I really (and I mean REALLY) don't care what other people may (or may not) think. And, I'm that way for good reason...first off, I don't play to what others may think because I do what I do based on MY view. And second, the tenets of creativity demand that one takes a child's view and engages in child's play. If that means the play is rough some times, so be it. I draw the line only at illegal behavior (mostly although I have been known to get speeding tickets).

:~)

So, dooode, you can TRY to change my behavior but I doubt you'll have much success. I've been married for 35 years and my wife has learned that doesn't work so well.
Logged
rdonson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1420


WWW
« Reply #74 on: January 02, 2008, 05:26:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Geez guys, do we really need flame wars on LL?  Trying to communicate ideas and information via forums is tough enough as it is.
Logged

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'][span style='font-family:Arial'][span style='font-family:Geneva'][span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Regards,
Ron[/span][/span][/span][/span]
Bruce Watson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


WWW
« Reply #75 on: January 03, 2008, 12:45:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...and I really (and I mean REALLY) don't care what other people may (or may not) think. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164661\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Of course you care. Otherwise you wouldn't bother posting here or anywhere else and you wouldn't be trumpeting your expertise claims to anyone who will listen.
Quote
...you can TRY to change my behavior...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164661\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't want to change your behavior. I want you to take your behavior out to the sandbox where it belongs. Leave the rest of us in peace.

To the other members of this service I say simply this. We are all responsible for our own behavior, including enabling list bullies by listening to them. If enough of us turn out backs on the list bullies they will either stop being so annoying or eventually go away. You have to decide whether an individual's postings are worth the aggravation they cause. If you judge someone to be more trouble then they are worth, plonk them.

Just as I have now plonked Mr. Schewe.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #76 on: January 03, 2008, 01:27:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Schewe and Rodney may not be the most diplomatic of folks, but they are some of the world's foremost authorities on color management and getting the best possible color accuracy and print quality. In contrast, the counter-arguments offered by the print guys have been misleading excuses at best. If you want to ignore the most authoritative and practically useful advice out there, that's your perogative, but you're shooting yourself in the foot by doing so.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2008, 01:54:10 PM by Jonathan Wienke » Logged

Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5421


WWW
« Reply #77 on: January 03, 2008, 02:41:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Of course you care. Otherwise you wouldn't bother posting here or anywhere else and you wouldn't be trumpeting your expertise claims to anyone who will listen.

Uh huh...ok, let me try again (watch my lips) I really, really don't care about what other people think...my entire career as a photographer has been spent doing what I want to do, not what the market "wanted" me to do.

And, if you find that unfathomable, I would suggest that's _YOUR_ baggage coloring your judgement. Ya see, I bet you DO care what others think and that may indeed be a problem–it's a problem a lot of "creative people" suffer from...doing things to satisfy others rather than themselves.

Quote
Just as I have now plonked Mr. Schewe.

Oh, goodie!!! I've been PLONKED!

COOL!

:~)
Logged
Bruce Watson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


WWW
« Reply #78 on: January 03, 2008, 02:53:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Schewe and Rodney may not be the most diplomatic of folks, but they are some of the world's foremost authorities on color management and getting the best possible color accuracy and print quality. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No one has to be a diplomat -- the bar is much lower than that. But simple civility is called for.

And while I acknowledge the pair's contributions, as you say they are "some of" and not the only authorities. There are many sources if what you are looking for is answers.

Quote
In contrast, the counter-arguments offered by the print guys have been misleading excuses at best. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I disagree, my reasons are in one of my previous posts. And I also point out that the three "print guys" are acknowledged master printers and are every bit as knowledgeable in their fields as the others are in theirs. Five of the "worlds foremost authorities" by my count.

Quote
If you want to ignore the most authoritative and practically useful advice out there, that's your perogative, but you're shooting yourself in the foot by doing so.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=164837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My foot will be just fine thank you. No one has to put up with bad behavior to get answers, nor should they. There is no shortage of people with authoritative and practically useful advice out there; there are hundreds of books on the use of Photoshop for example, and at least some of those authors participate in some of the lists, and are considerably easier to get along with to boot.

No one person holds all the keys to the kingdom. We don't have to put up with list bullies to get answers.
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad