Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Need A New 44" Printer  (Read 1379 times)

benmarcin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16
Need A New 44" Printer
« on: February 26, 2022, 04:08:32 pm »

I've owned an Epson 9800 for over fifteen years and it has been a fantastic workhorse of a printer. It is showing its age and, at the moment, is not printing at all. In looking at my Epson options, I see that there's a P8000, P9000 and P9570 currently on the market. The P9570 is the newer of the three but I've read some fairly lousy reviews regarding it, some of it in this forum.  Could anyone give me any advice on which of the three I should seriously consider purchasing? I'm a fine-art photographer and, while I do a fair bit of printing, I'm not going to run it 8-12 hours a day like a production lab would. I'm looking for high quality 40x50" prints versus signage or posters. I'm not really considering the Canon printers because I have read that their inks are not at the same archival level as Epson's. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Ben
www.benmarcinphotos.com
Logged

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2022, 12:04:29 am »

Iím in the same boat as you for the last year and have also rejected the new Canons and HPZ9 for different reasons.

I had really wanted the 9570 but would dare to order one now. They never resolved the nasty issues going on with the head being too close to the media, and paper ripping off the core and slamming into the heads. Thatís potential head damage every freaking day you turn it on. So far itís a big mess from what Iíve read from users all over the world on these forums, from people who really wanted it to deliver. Itís really fast.

For a really good precision printer for art and production.jobs Iím going back to the P9000. Image quality all around is superb  and with no headaches . Only downside is having to switch black inks but I would, as much  as its painfully old fashioned, learn to live with that unfortunate sad defect.

 I just canít even think about baby sitting the 9570. They just never finished it before putting it on the market and the support for it has been the single worst situation Iíve heard of. It needs a major recall but thatís a long shot of ever happening knowing Epson.

John


I've owned an Epson 9800 for over fifteen years and it has been a fantastic workhorse of a printer. It is showing its age and, at the moment, is not printing at all. In looking at my Epson options, I see that there's a P8000, P9000 and P9570 currently on the market. The P9570 is the newer of the three but I've read some fairly lousy reviews regarding it, some of it in this forum.  Could anyone give me any advice on which of the three I should seriously consider purchasing? I'm a fine-art photographer and, while I do a fair bit of printing, I'm not going to run it 8-12 hours a day like a production lab would. I'm looking for high quality 40x50" prints versus signage or posters. I'm not really considering the Canon printers because I have read that their inks are not at the same archival level as Epson's. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Ben
www.benmarcinphotos.com
Logged

mearussi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 739
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #2 on: February 27, 2022, 01:40:41 am »

Iím in the same boat as you for the last year and have also rejected the new Canons and HPZ9 for different reasons.

I had really wanted the 9570 but would dare to order one now. They never resolved the nasty issues going on with the head being too close to the media, and paper ripping off the core and slamming into the heads. Thatís potential head damage every freaking day you turn it on. So far itís a big mess from what Iíve read from users all over the world on these forums, from people who really wanted it to deliver. Itís really fast.

For a really good precision printer for art and production.jobs Iím going back to the P9000. Image quality all around is superb  and with no headaches . Only downside is having to switch black inks but I would, as much  as its painfully old fashioned, learn to live with that unfortunate sad defect.

 I just canít even think about baby sitting the 9570. They just never finished it before putting it on the market and the support for it has been the single worst situation Iíve heard of. It needs a major recall but thatís a long shot of ever happening knowing Epson.

John
I'm curious why you rejected the Canons and HP.
Logged

neil snape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1440
    • http://www.neilsnape.com
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #3 on: February 27, 2022, 02:52:37 am »

The HP Z9 has no support, is a very capricious beast that has no place in an individual use. In a print shop, it may work. Too bad as it had huge potential, but was an after thought that was abandoned too quickly. They even came out with a Pro version, again no way it could work for individuals, only for big set ups with extended service contracts.

Logged

JRSmit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 922
    • Jan R. Smit Fine Art Printing Specialist
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #4 on: February 27, 2022, 03:33:28 am »

I am using surecolor p9000 from the moment they arrived on the market, as wel as scp7000 and scp8000. And did use a 9500 but switched to scp9000 and never looked back.
I print mostly on fine art mat and also fine art gloss, not on photopaper. I switch between different rolls 5 to 10 time a day.
Logged
Fine art photography: janrsmit.com
Fine Art Printing Specialist: www.fineartprintingspecialist.nl


Jan R. Smit

dgberg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2565
    • http://bergscanvasgallery.com http://bergscustomfurniture.com
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2022, 09:34:21 am »

Coming from a 7900 9890 and 9900 we looked at all the newer models and instead went with 2 P8000's They have both been top notch machines.
At around $3500 you cannot beat it without spending considerably more. The black ink switch, new inkset  and extra colors were not worth the uncharge Epson wanted.

eddiehop

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #6 on: February 27, 2022, 10:24:27 am »

Iím in the same boat as you for the last year and have also rejected the new Canons and HPZ9 for different reasons.
...
John


John
Can you give your reasons for rejecting the HP Z9? 

Anyone out there having good experiences with the HP Z9 at this point in time?  (Nice printer but if the software is not kept up with changing operating systems--especially OS systems--it is going to be nothing but a headache.)

We are owners of a now defunct and ready to be disposed of HP Z3100 and were planning to upgrade to the HP Z9 (44").  Your rejection of the HP Z9--and Neil's negative remarks definitely give us pause.

Thanks for any guidance...

Ed
Logged

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2022, 11:56:40 am »

I donít trust them, lots of reasons including serious support going forward. From what I can see is the Z9+ is and has never been a priority for HP.

Rather than going through all that again I would encourage you to search this form and do a Google search for reviews of the printer.

I will say one thing, Iíve been looking for a new printer and had my files printed by major fine art shops in North America. I havenít found a single one that uses a Z9+ Or even considered buying one. That is HPs fault 100% . Iíve only heard from a couple of people who were given them to test.  My sense is that the excellent engineers that were serious about innovation and precision and created the amazing profiling system of the early Zs no longer work there. They are gone and that is very sad. I met some of those guys 13 years ago,  and they were great

Iím also mad that they keep increasing the prices of z3200 70 inks and they are more and more difficult to find. If they are wanting me to upgrade to the Z9 thatís not going to happen. They have pushed me back to Epson for a whole lot of reasons. Honestly I donít know why they even came out with the Z9 , they never supported it.

As things are right now, the two printers I am not considering are the Z9+ and the recent Epson 9570∑

John






John
Can you give your reasons for rejecting the HP Z9? 

Anyone out there having good experiences with the HP Z9 at this point in time?  (Nice printer but if the software is not kept up with changing operating systems--especially OS systems--it is going to be nothing but a headache.)

We are owners of a now defunct and ready to be disposed of HP Z3100 and were planning to upgrade to the HP Z9 (44").  Your rejection of the HP Z9--and Neil's negative remarks definitely give us pause.

Thanks for any guidance...

Ed
« Last Edit: February 28, 2022, 11:30:16 pm by deanwork »
Logged

benmarcin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #8 on: February 28, 2022, 08:58:12 pm »

Thank you for all the responses. I am most likely going to buy a P9000 this week based on many of the comments here.
Logged

JRSmit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 922
    • Jan R. Smit Fine Art Printing Specialist
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #9 on: March 04, 2022, 03:28:14 am »

Best choice.
Logged
Fine art photography: janrsmit.com
Fine Art Printing Specialist: www.fineartprintingspecialist.nl


Jan R. Smit

mcpix

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
    • Macframes
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #10 on: March 04, 2022, 10:52:10 am »

I'm in the same boat. At this point, I'm still running my 12.5 year old Canon 8300. It works great and has printed a lot of work over the years. However, It has one minor problem that I have to work around, and gave me a completely new error this week (that I also thankfully resolved). I know I'm pushing my luck to keep using it, but I'm not excited about the current choices. I would buy another Canon except for the new inks and their reported shorter display life. I keep hoping that they'll update them with more archival inks. I was excited about the Epson 9570, but reports from owners are mixed. It looks like the older Epson P9000 is the best bet right now, but it's not entirely free from head clogging issues.

It seems crazy to me that neither Epson or Canon can make a quality large format printer that has archival inks and is reliable.
Logged

routlaw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
    • http://www.roboutlawphotography.com
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #11 on: March 14, 2022, 07:41:01 pm »

I bought the 4100 and other than the software have no regrets, and after a couple of years with the software I'm finally getting used to itÖ begrudgingly.

As for archival issues assuming what we have heard is the gospel the following is my take on it. For some who read this they might think I am a charter member of the good enough society, which isn't the case. In the not too distant past the most stable product were Cibachrome prints good for a whopping 40-50 years (if memory serves me correct) and before Cibachrome we had decades of Type R, and Type C prints and they couldn't last half as long as a Cibachrome. Other than properly processed silver gelatin or platinum prints nothing else was truly archival in the eyes of the photographic community.

It doesn't end there. Through the years I have had the pleasure to work with nationally recognized and celebrated artist from all over the country (US), some of the best publishing houses and a few museums. While most museums seem to take archival stability serious the others not always so much, and on more than one occasion I've heard artist state they are not the least concerned about their art once they are six feet under. When commissioned to photograph, restore and print much older works of art some far less than a century old its amazing what poor condition they are in. Rotten canvas or linen, frames coming completely apart, images fading significantly or worse tarnished so badly original colors are either muted or polluted, prints in tatters or worse. The point is most artist work turns out to be not too archival at all. I'm not going to beat a dead horse over this but at times it seems to me the photography community can be its own worst enemy regarding archival stability. Photographic prints as a rule sell for nickels, dimes or quarters on the dollar, if lucky, yet we seemed to be far more obsessed about how long they will last compared to an original painting created by artist who at times can seem indifferent to the issueÖ within reason.

Worldwide there are millions of photographers out there and some of them pretty darn good including many amateur enthusiast but how many photographers alive today will be known once they have past, let alone be collected artist whose work is actually valuable? Only a very finite fraction of 1%. Personally I am not arrogant enough to believe any of my prints will be worth more than the paper and ink they are printed on once I've vacated the premises. Anyone who thinks the reproductions we create of original works of art will increase in value and becomes an art investment is delusional. Its just not going to happen.

This post will probably stir up a hornets nest and why I've refrained from posting such for a long time. But the notion of not replacing an aging older printer with the Canon 4100 due to purported archival issues or lack there of seems silly to me. FWIW, I started with an Epson 10000, then the 9600, then a Canon 8300 and now the 4100. Other than the software, the 4100 is vastly superior to the others. While I think Epson is a fairly good company, I would never ever want to own another one of their printers. I've probably thrown enough of their desktop printers away they could have filled up the back of my pickup truck let alone the large format version.
Logged

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #12 on: March 14, 2022, 09:15:47 pm »

For doing commercial giclee or whatever you want to call it I get it. I agree. Who the hell wants to fight with either crazy hardware malfunctions or software glitches every freaking day, clogged nozzles etc.

Canons just get the job done every time and you can make money with them. They donít keep you up at night cursing. They just donít.  The 4100 is plenty fast because bi-direction printing is great, you really donít loose any sleep at night  owing them. Only expense you have is putting in new heads every year if in production or 2 years if a low volume guy.

I almost cried when my 8300 died. It was the most dependable thing in my life.

My problems with the current Canon are three things that are very important to me personally


1. There is no way to make great monochrome work with them. That is no issue for probably half the buyers. Even if they did still allow the fine Bowhouse TBW software to run on them like I did the 8300, the gray inks are so damn bluish that you have to add yellow to neutralize them. I wonít bore you with the issues that creates. After 13 years of running the HPZ printers with neutral grays and also doing great bw with Epsons through QTR, and also Piezography k7, of the three recent printers out there only Canon is incapable of producing great neutral bw that doesnít have metameric failure under different light sources. Thatís sad. Epson ABW has finally gotten the job done, easily.

2. They took the freaking Green channel out and put in a gloss enhancer that is inferior to what HP developed 13 years ago. Not good. It really only works well with rc , which shows you where their heads are at, same place the new hp is, designers.

3. Rather than dramatically improving the fade stability of their recent inks as Epson has done to catch up with HP, Canon  ( Lucia Pro ), did the opposite , they dumbed them down, by 1/3. Bright daylight in public buildings can kill prints like that in a matter of weeks or days not centuries.

It is funny to me that so many photographers say that they couldnít care less if their prints fade after they die. I do care, and not only that, I really care about the work of clients of mine which is all over the place out there in various light intensity locations, and I want a whole lot of this work to look great for their grand children , and possibly their grand childrenís grand children. What if all the great music in the world was recorded on material that wouldnít last the life of the musician? Would people consider that normal? Or what if a sculptors work deteriorated a decade after he died. You donít have to be famous to want your work to survive. If you simply donít value it that much then any ink will do, and a lot of people cranking out cheap prints use whatever inexpensive third party inks they can find and printing on junk media. Iím not saying thatís a sin, just not where I want to be. I just donít do that kind of work personally and neither do most of my colleagues, but that is a choice. Before digital pigments there was nothing we could make even reasonably permanent color photography with. All my color work from the 70s  and 80s is gone and Ciba  longevity was only good in dark storage, and then only on the super high gloss stuff which I hated.

However, ÖÖÖ.right now I need a 44Ē too, and the only things stupider than what Canon did is whatís going on at Epson and Hp.  Itís a bad time to have to buy anything.  And with all my complaints, Canon is mechanically safest one of the three.

For me at this moment I would have to select the Epson P9000 but not happily because it is not the most recent tech and once they are out of warranty they could bite you any day. The prints do everything I need done and plenty fast. But I wonít buy anything until later summer or early fall. Maybe sanity will be back then. Maybe not.




John



I bought the 4100 and other than the software have no regrets, and after a couple of years with the software I'm finally getting used to itÖ begrudgingly.

As for archival issues assuming what we have heard is the gospel the following is my take on it. For some who read this they might think I am a charter member of the good enough society, which isn't the case. In the not too distant past the most stable product were Cibachrome prints good for a whopping 40-50 years (if memory serves me correct) and before Cibachrome we had decades of Type R, and Type C prints and they couldn't last half as long as a Cibachrome. Other than properly processed silver gelatin or platinum prints nothing else was truly archival in the eyes of the photographic community.

It doesn't end there. Through the years I have had the pleasure to work with nationally recognized and celebrated artist from all over the country (US), some of the best publishing houses and a few museums. While most museums seem to take archival stability serious the others not always so much, and on more than one occasion I've heard artist state they are not the least concerned about their art once they are six feet under. When commissioned to photograph, restore and print much older works of art some far less than a century old its amazing what poor condition they are in. Rotten canvas or linen, frames coming completely apart, images fading significantly or worse tarnished so badly original colors are either muted or polluted, prints in tatters or worse. The point is most artist work turns out to be not too archival at all. I'm not going to beat a dead horse over this but at times it seems to me the photography community can be its own worst enemy regarding archival stability. Photographic prints as a rule sell for nickels, dimes or quarters on the dollar, if lucky, yet we seemed to be far more obsessed about how long they will last compared to an original painting created by artist who at times can seem indifferent to the issueÖ within reason.

Worldwide there are millions of photographers out there and some of them pretty darn good including many amateur enthusiast but how many photographers alive today will be known once they have past, let alone be collected artist whose work is actually valuable? Only a very finite fraction of 1%. Personally I am not arrogant enough to believe any of my prints will be worth more than the paper and ink they are printed on once I've vacated the premises. Anyone who thinks the reproductions we create of original works of art will increase in value and becomes an art investment is delusional. Its just not going to happen.

This post will probably stir up a hornets nest and why I've refrained from posting such for a long time. But the notion of not replacing an aging older printer with the Canon 4100 due to purported archival issues or lack there of seems silly to me. FWIW, I started with an Epson 10000, then the 9600, then a Canon 8300 and now the 4100. Other than the software, the 4100 is vastly superior to the others. While I think Epson is a fairly good company, I would never ever want to own another one of their printers. I've probably thrown enough of their desktop printers away they could have filled up the back of my pickup truck let alone the large format version.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2022, 02:49:56 pm by deanwork »
Logged

routlaw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
    • http://www.roboutlawphotography.com
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #13 on: March 15, 2022, 08:08:01 pm »

@ John aka deanwork. My experience with this printer (canon 4100) is about as 180 degrees diametrically opposed to yours as possible. First I get amazing black and white prints with very deep blacks and as close to neutral tones as any printer i have seen or used. I have no idea why you cannot. Secondly by now I have produced well into the hundreds perhaps thousands of prints from the 4100 and have never not once heard any complaints about about faded or killed prints even from clients who produce canvas prints. Certainly none of mine have shown this issue so its really not clear to me where you are coming from on this. Lastly the elimination of the green channel thus far has not been an issue for me either and from what I can tell the reduced gamut in this area only presents itself with very acid greens like you would find the Pacific NW rainforest for instance. Admittedly I was a bit concerned about this going in since my personal work is with landscapes but thus far its really not been an issue.

The gloss optimizer is somewhat of a mixed bag and when used properly really does make an image pop a bit more and adds some depth. However it can be delicate on some papers like the Canson Infinity Platine Rag. Why I don't know but in most cases if a scuff or mar appears it usually buffs out easily with a very fine micro cloth of the same quality you would use on lenses. I do agree with you that none of these companies have completely aced a perfect printer but for me the 4100 certainly comes closer than any other ones I have tried or read about.

In conclusion at the risk of beating a dead horse I am truly astonished at some of the results you've described with this printer, it has certainly not been that way for me. I will add however I build all of my own custom printer profiles with the X-rite iOne Pro but even with the few times I've used the canned profiles from manufacturers those prints are also very good with no issues. Thanks for the response and good luck.
Logged

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2290
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2022, 11:35:30 pm »

I had 13x19 bw prints made from a very full scale file that I use to test all kinds of monochrome. I sent the file to different high-end labs . I had that file printed on the P2000, the 9570, 4100, The HP Z9, and I printed it myself with K7 ink in Epson 9890 matte media, and my Z3200 .  I have test printed this file on my old 8300 with true black and white software which though it is not up to HP or Epson rgb QTR prints of that file it was ok but used a lot of yellow ink for neutral, and the warm monochrome always looked different with various light sources, so I rarely used it for best bw work.

All I can say is that the 4100 which was printed 16 bit rgb with a very good profile by people who know what they are doing, was the only print I would consider not workable for me. The one paper that I consider I have to use for monochrome gloss work is Platine. I donít like the so called Alpha Cel.Baryta papers Iíve tried  because they curl too much especially in roll  and has other gloss issues like bronzing with bw. I need cotton and pigment whiteners.  So that is what was used on all of them, Platine. I also had a color chart printed on the same paper to compare gamut, dither, etc on that media. The new Epson had the best gamut overall but not a deal breaker for me.

It is ironic that the two printers that looked bad in regard to poor gloss smoothness were the HPZ9 and the Canon 4100. These are the two that have dedicated gloss enhancer channels. Go figure. My old Z3200 has excellent gloss enhancer coverage so I assume the problem there lies with the dumbed down profiling software that HP never finished.

There have been numerous people on the lists that have the 4100 that  hated what Canon did by removing the green. People that specialize in landscapes really miss having that green. I could probably live with it, maybe.

A noticeably better dither came from the P2000 and the 9570 and the best most cleanly neutral prints on Platine
came from these two printers and my Z3200 with 6000 patch target icc. I have seen bw prints before these recent ones  on the 4100 as well that looked similar to the 4100 I just had made, but not from my file.

Anyway, we all have our needs and standards and picking a printer-inkset can be a multi-leveled decision. Maybe there is a place on the web where pros  are comparing and raving about the great Canon monochrome stuff they are doing, I just havenít seen it at all since they came out. I wish we had better comparative reviews by third parties but they donít seem to exist anymore. If Canon has significantly improved their bw capability from the original Lucia inks I havenít found where they or anyone else has written about it. Maybe itís there and I just havenít discovered it.

Actually most of my clients donít sell their work, either photographs or painting reproductions on fine papers, for pocket change, so weíre talking about different needs for different galleries. Someone who is not well known at all sold a 30x40 for $3,500.00 last week and other galleries selling long  established photographers for more than that regularly. A lot more clients are asking about longevity figures for color work
these days. In the past, not as much.

I ordered a sample bw print from Canon Sales from this printer and it was on rc and it was not good. I realize you canít totally rely on that.

Maybe I should have someone else make this print on Platine on a 4100, if I could find someone,  because Iím convinced they are the most durable and trouble free machines right now. But if the gloss situation is not working out on Platine, it doesnít matter. I have too many editions out there on it that have to be reprinted all the time. On my old 8300 I had to spray the bw gloss with uv sprays, especially if itís going in a portfolio where people are holding them in their hands. 

Another thing I do really like about the Canon is you can set up a Q for knocking out 50 big prints and you can leave the studio and let it go because you are not going to see any clogging or head scraping issues. Itís a great printer for cranking out canvas and many many people use it for that.

John






@ John aka deanwork. My experience with this printer (canon 4100) is about as 180 degrees diametrically opposed to yours as possible. First I get amazing black and white prints with very deep blacks and as close to neutral tones as any printer i have seen or used. I have no idea why you cannot. Secondly by now I have produced well into the hundreds perhaps thousands of prints from the 4100 and have never not once heard any complaints about about faded or killed prints even from clients who produce canvas prints. Certainly none of mine have shown this issue so its really not clear to me where you are coming from on this. Lastly the elimination of the green channel thus far has not been an issue for me either and from what I can tell the reduced gamut in this area only presents itself with very acid greens like you would find the Pacific NW rainforest for instance. Admittedly I was a bit concerned about this going in since my personal work is with landscapes but thus far its really not been an issue.

The gloss optimizer is somewhat of a mixed bag and when used properly really does make an image pop a bit more and adds some depth. However it can be delicate on some papers like the Canson Infinity Platine Rag. Why I don't know but in most cases if a scuff or mar appears it usually buffs out easily with a very fine micro cloth of the same quality you would use on lenses. I do agree with you that none of these companies have completely aced a perfect printer but for me the 4100 certainly comes closer than any other ones I have tried or read about.

In conclusion at the risk of beating a dead horse I am truly astonished at some of the results you've described with this printer, it has certainly not been that way for me. I will add however I build all of my own custom printer profiles with the X-rite iOne Pro but even with the few times I've used the canned profilesi8 from manufacturers those prints are also very good with no issues. Thanks for the response and good luck.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2022, 12:56:53 am by deanwork »
Logged

BAB

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 469
Re: Need A New 44" Printer
« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2022, 02:19:47 pm »

Its always possible to buy a Canon and Epson printer (a smaller one) and print on both of them to see which system suits you and how the prints compare...then you're ready to make a decision for the Big printer based on your own experiance.

To make my point I traveled with a pretty well known photographer and owner of a printing lab who insisted his lab never used paper profiles and alway let printer manage color!!!!! Shortly after by chance I was in the company of a few of his past customers all I can say is WOW they were not happy campers with this labs work.

Logged
I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kic
Pages: [1]   Go Up