1: I was handed the mag by a friend and tried to find the article. Contents was no help: no page number assigned to the info. Had to come to web site to learn that "point of view" page 165 was the target.

2: Nice information. I thought that Kodak did not respond to Epson's objections to the Kodak method. Maybe I misunderstood, or maybe that was the real order in which the papers were issued, and there was no attempt to give each side a way to deal with the issues.

3: Therefore, until I can see better information, as a matter of practicality, and my current level of understanding, I'll continue to use the Epson systems as they evolve.

George Van Noy

Kodak continues to march to thr beat of their own drummer; just as with the granularity testing for film.
I will stick with my Epson printers but find myself sending more out to a service bureau; real RA4 paper and it is cheaper than what I can do it on inkjet anyway.

This article was very valuable to me and I hope more articles like these will appear in Shutterbug. It appears that specmanship is more important to Kodak than honest, useful information. Keep this kind of information coming, George!