Robert Edge

Thanks, I've sent her an e-mail. My own experience is that smaller organisations are frequently more responsive than large ones. If the staff are overworked, or the right technology is not in place, ASC members really ought to do something about it. Magazine and book sales are, or at least should be, a profit centre, and should be run in a business-like manner. There is no point in an organisation setting up contact addresses if it can't handle the load. This just causes stress for the organisation and frustration for customers. The net result is ill-will, which non-profit organisations in particular can't afford. I don't think that the concerns I expressed in this thread are as much about efficiency as they are about ethical business practices. The outsider does not see what is going on within the ASC. What the outsider sees is that the ASC, from an objective point of view, is doing things that one does not expect from a legitimate organisation and that undermine its credibility. Subscription offers that purport to be something they are not hurt the organisation. Indeed, when a misleading subscription offer is accompanied by a profile of an ASC member endorsing the product, it undermines the credibility of that member. This example pales in comparison to the promotional material for the new digital subscription programme, which without question is misleading. In light of your post about the nature of the organisation, I am prepared to accept the idea that the person who wrote the promotional material simply forgot, in his or her enthusiasm, to mention that there are restrictions to a digital subscription that make it highly unattractive for a good number of current and potential subscribers. On the substance, I think that it is a real shame that the ASC has decided to launch a digital programme that stands a good chance of being dead in the water. I believe that there is a real market for a digital subscription that is properly archivable, especially if it utilizes a mainstream and well-supported application like Adobe. If the concern is that people will share subscriptions electronically, thereby undermining the subscription base and advertising revenue, surely it is possible to place a temporary lock, say for six months, on the ability to transfer electronic copies of the magazine from computer to computer. Indeed, I subscribe to a magazine that addresses this issue on the honour principle - the publisher simply appeals to the fair play of subscribers. This has worked for the three years that the magazine in question has been doing this. In any event, the nature of the digital subscription needs to be clarified. The main reason is that the current promotional material is substantively misleading. The practical reason is that the ASC may find that it has a major headache on its hands dealing with subscribers who have forked over their money without finding out, beforehand, what they are getting into. There are reasons why other publishers that have bought into Zinio state on their web sites what the restrictions are, not the least being that failure to do so probably opens up a magazine to a class action suit for general and punitive damages. Regarding Eric's question, which I take to be an attempt to be smart, the ASC web site has a contact page that lists an e-mail address for customer issues but not a "subscription number". There is a general office number, listed at the bottom of the contact page, which in my naivete I assumed is designed for dealing with mainstream ASC business rather than customer complaints. Indeed, the ASC's last e-mail to me suggests that I contact that number IF the e-mail exchange does not resolve the problem. Indeed, the publisher, as stated in David's thread, has suggested that I contact her by e-mail. Beyond that, during part of the period during which this issue was going on, I was in Europe. Transatlantic (or I guess in this case transpacific) long distance calls are sufficiently expensive that it would have been cheaper to order the magazine as a back issue than to try to resolve this over the phone. However, Eric, if the ASC would prefer that customers who have a problem call its main switchboard, preferably collect for those of us who live outside the US, I shall of course be pleased to oblige.

When Zeiss announced last month that it plans to produce lenses for Nikon mount cameras, there were a number of references to the company's cine lenses (see www.zeiss.de). The main announcement said, in part: "ZF lenses provide Nikon F-mount cameras with the creative potential and phototechnical performance available so far only in the Contax system. In addition, ZF lenses incorporate new technical advances from the ZEISS Ultra Prime®, Master Prime® and DigiPrime® lenses for motion picture cameras. Results have been seen in feature films like "Lord of the Rings", "Alexander", "King Arthur", "Air Force One", "Collateral", "King Kong" and many commercials and music clips. "Like the ZEISS lenses for motion picture, ZF lenses feature unusually high mechanical quality, fixed focal length, very precise manual focussing, reliability, and exceptional durability. Special attention is paid to guarantee absolute color matching throughout the whole range of lenses resulting in state-of-the-art image quality." The Zeiss web site also included the following Q and A: "CLN: And why would they prefer Zeiss ZF to Nikon? Müller: I see two reasons. First because they know that with Zeiss lenses they will get state-of-the-art image quality, technically and aesthetically. They will recognize that ZF lenses come with much larger rotation angles for the focus rings, like the cinematography lenses we make for Hollywood. This means that focusing can be performed much more accurately than with designs optimized for photojournalistic work." Zeiss says that the lenses will be priced competitively with Nikon's own lenses. That raises the interesting question of whether they might be suitable for use with a 16mm camera, such as the A-Minima, that takes a Nikon mount. Does anyone know whether Zeiss has elaborated on what "technical advances" have been incorporated from the cine lenses or on just how large the rotation angles angles will be compared to cine lenses? The first lenses, apparently available this spring, are on the long side (an F1.4 50mm and an F1.4 85mm), but apparently more will be available in the fall. Has Zeiss said how wide this series will go?

Lordy, Lordy, I know that already. The question is, where does it come from and who is using it? When Edward Burns uses it, as he does ad nauseum, it sounds fake. That means, if it comes out of New York, it ain't from his neighbourhood. Is it an LA term, or something that filmmakers think is cool? Really, this is a job for Safire, or the younger participants in this forum. Dare I say that this is a job for Ashley and Landon?

Josh, I was looking to you, as a guy who appears to be pretty savvy about current espression, to enlighten me on this word. The disappointment is devastating. Up here in the Great White North, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has given an hour long nightly news show to a guy whose job is to relate to young people. Some people think that his show is a joke. But others of us have noticed little difference in terms of substantive content between his show and CNN, except that he's rather more hip than Larry King. Anyway, even he has talked about giving someone props, and I I have even seen the word used on this web site. Enlightenment please. Or do we have to bring in someone like William Safire?

Last Tuesday, I sent e-mails to the American Society of Cinematographers and Zinio asking specific questions about digital subscriptions to American Cinematographer. To date, neither the ASC nor Zinio has replied. Here is what the ASC says about a digital subscription on its web site: "Now you can take your American Cinematographer subscription anywhere you have an internet connection. Save on postage and enjoy the full experience of the magazine with a digital subscription." "AC has partnered with Zinio, the world's leading digital newsstand, to deliver your American Cinematographer subscription directly to your laptop or desktop computer. You receive your issue at the same time the issues go out to the newsstands, and your electronic issue will be identical to the print version with all the advantages of being digital: "Each issue is delivered directly to your laptop or desktop computer Once delivered, you can read it even if you're not connected to the internet Search through issues using keywords Keep your back issues archived on your computer for easy access Overseas subscribers save a bundle on postage." There is something that the ASC has chosen not to reveal to people who buy the digital subscription. A digital copy of the magazine cannot be downloaded more than twice and cannot be transfered from one computer to another. This is like selling a music CD or film DVD and failing to tell the customer that it cannot be played on more than two players, ever. If you load a digital copy of AC to a desktop and laptop computer, the result is that you no longer have access to the copy once the two computers are retired. In my case, that means that access to back issues, for which I have paid, would be limited to about 18 months. I did not find out about this from the ASC web site. I found out about it when I was on the verge of letting the ASC debit my credit card for a digital subscription for US$90 and decided to do some research elsewhere on the net. I am not surprised that the ASC has failed to respond to my e-mail about this. Their customer support is non-existent. Since last September, I have been trying to get the ASC to send me a copy of the August issue, which I did not receive. My e-mail exchange with them, which follows, would be comic were it not for the fact that it has taken up far too much of my time and demonstrates arrogance, rudeness and disgregard for paying customers on the part of the ASC: To the ASC, September 29, 2005: Subject: Subscription Problem I have a subscription to American Cinematographer, but I did not receive the August issue. Could you mail it to me at: [my address] Thanks. From the ASC, September 29, 2005: Subject: your american cinematographer a replacement copy of the american cinematographer august 2005 issue has been sent out to you, you can expect to receive it shortly, i just need to ask that when you do not receive you monthly issue, that you call us or e-mail us to notify us that you have not received your copy as soon as possible and not over a month later, keep in mind that whe are always a month ahead and if there are any changes they will not be made until the following month. thank you alex lopez circulation manager To the ASC, September 29, 2005: Subject: re: your american cinematographer I have been out of the country for the last three months and discovered this on my return. If you are questioning my veracity about this, just say so. If not, then I must say that I don't understand your point that I advise you "as soon as possible and not over a month later". Have a good day. To the ASC, October 31, 2005: Subject: re: your american cinematographer I just recieved the November issue. I am still waiting for the August issue. Has it been sent yet? Thanks. To the ASC, November 8, 2005: Subject: Could someone please reply Could I please get a reply to these e-mails? Thanks. [e-mails to date appended] To the ASC, November 14, 2005: Subject: For the Circulation Manager Could you please tell me what I have to do to get a response to these e-mails and, specifically, the August issue of the magazine to which I subscribe? Thanks. [e-mails to date appended] To the Editor and President of the ASC, November 17, 2005: Subject: Customer Service I am sorry to trouble you, but repeated e-mails to your circulation department remain unanswered. Please see the below exchange. Thanks. [e-mails to date appended] Neither the Editor nor the President, nor anyone on their behalf, saw fit to respond. On January 25, 2006, I decided to take one last shot at reaching these people: To the ASC, January 25, 2006: Subject: Subscription Problem I did not receive the August issue and so I sent an e-mail to your office. On Sept. 29, Mr. Alex Lopez replied stating that the issue was being sent. I have sent repeated follow-up e-mails since then, but have not received a reply to any of them, and I have still not received the August issue. Could someone please advise that the magazine is being sent. Thanks. From the ASC or, rather, what appears to be an automatic reply generator, January 25, 2006: Subject: Subscription Problem Greetings! Thank you for your inquiry. I have forwarded it to our circulation department where it will hopefully be dealt with as soon as possible. If you feel your request hasn't been addressed within a reasonable amount of time, please feel free to contact our offices in the US at (323)-969-4333. If you call after business hours (9:00 AM-5:00 Pacific Standard Time, Monday-Friday), you may dial ext. 112 for the voicemail our circulation manager, once prompted. Thank you! As of today, February 15, 2006, I have still not received the August issue. Maybe somebody connected with the ASC will read this and consider the possibility that there are some problems, to put it charitably, with the ASC's marketing and treatment of customers. Indeed, I believe that someone from the ASC should have the decency to respond to this thread on the following issues: Does the ASC intend to change its web site so that there is a substantively honest description of its digital subscription offer? What is the policy rationale, or for that matter economic rationale, for selling a digital subscription that has limitations that are actually more restrictive than those attached to CDs and DVDs and, for that matter, the purchase of Adobe software that costs serious money, Adobe being particularly aggressive when it comes to rights management? Does the ASC care about customer service and, if so, what does it intend to do, if anything, to ensure that paying customers do not spend months trying to resolve what ought to be simple problems? Does the ASC, as a non-profit organisation, believe that it is ethical to send a letter to current subscribers asking them to renew, described as a "special Clubhouse offer", which turns out, if one logs on to the ASC web site, to be nothing special at all, and that would in fact be inferior by quite a lot of money, for foreign subscribers, to the digital subscription, were it not for the fact that the digital subscription turns out to be dishonestly described. I am inclined to bump this thread once a week until the ASC addresses these issues. It does itself, and its customers, a disservice when it rolls out a digital subscription programme that is substantively misleading. Potential subscribers deserve to know what they are actually buying. Hopefully, the ASC will itself at some point see fit to be more forthcoming in its description of the product. Personally, I think a digital subscription is a great idea, but the restrictions make it, from my point of view, pretty much a non-starter as an option. If someone at the ASC, as a result of this post, actually puts a copy of the August issue into an actual envelope and actually mails it to me, I'll consider it a bonus :) [This has been edited at 21:30 EST, Feb. 15, 2006]

People who use the word "newbie", which sounds like baby-talk, deserve to be called n00bs, which sounds like a great synonym for loser. Where does "props" come from, as in giving someone props? I first heard this on supplementary material to the Sidewalks of New York DVD, during which Edward Burns uses it repeatedly. Truly aggravating.

And here I thought that the persistent use of lowercase was the exclusive province of 15 year old boys who have just discovered ee cummings. I'm convinced that computer screens make it hard to see errors. This is compounded if one is using, as I frequently am, a handheld device, with a 5.5cm x 4cm screen, to post. Besides, we all have our quirks. One of the contributors to this very thread, who writes as well as anyone on this site, regularly uses "off of", a capital offence in the opinion of some grammarians, even if both Shakespeare and James Joyce did the same thing.

The D70 is selling for US$900 and the D200, if you can find one, is US$1700. The latter sounds like a good choice if you are going to subject a camera to hard use and/or are doing event/sport/action photography. The only review I've seen that compares the D70 and the D200 is at www.kenrockwell.com. Canon is expected to announce a new, competing dSLR at the PMA show in Orlando starting Feb. 26. It will be interesting to see how it is priced. Looking at the specs for the D200, one thin I noticed is that the minimum ISO is 100, compared to the D70's ISO 200. The way that I use my D70, the difference doesn't matter, but it may make a difference for some people.

Pedro, Now that I re-read your post, I realize that you are talking about using light to write directly on a frame of 16mm film. I'm curious to know what you think the difference is if you use the camera and film to record the effect of light on a panel lit from behind, giving you a larger surface on which to manipulate the light.

Pedro, If I understand your post, you are talking about a technique called painting with light. It has been used by experimental still photographers and also it has been widely used in the advertising industry. Indeed, there is a commercial device that is used for this purpose that employs fibre optics, called a "hose". Some of the most interesting painting with light work has been done with ordinary flashlights. There are also people who have combined painting with light and a camera with a flexible bellows between the camera body and the lens that is moved around during the shot. You may find it useful to look up "painting with light" on the net. If I correctly understand what you are planning to do, you may also find it useful to experiment with a still camera before you blow a lot of motion picture film. It is a very hit and miss process unless you have experience with it. There's a fellow with whom I have corresponded by e-mail, who uses both painting with light and a flexible bellows, who has told me that it took him a long time to amalgamate both techniques to produce a book that he has published. Speaking only about painting with light, one of the most impressive examples that I have seen is of a man standing on the roof of a building in New York. I don't recall the name of the photographer, but he is well known (except to me at the moment), and you should not have a lot of trouble finding the photo on the internet. Best of luck with this.

When I use my 4x5, I sometimes shoot some black and white polaroid before shooting the final photograph. I use Polaroids to fine-tune composition and lighting, especially with still life compositions, and exposure. The only reason I do it is that I can place the Polaroid sheet in exactly the same plane as the sheet film will go. Were it not for that, I would consider it a waste of time and money. Apart from a 4x5, I use a Nikon D70 and a Mamiya 6x7 rangefinder. To pick up on David's comment about the adequacy of the D70, it depends on what one is using it for. I can see why a professional still photographer who is making his living from 35mm work would want the top Nikon or Canon. He will get a more rugged and faster camera that can be used day in and day out. I think that the D70, in terms of quality, build quality and speed is completely adequate for anyone else, especially someone whose need for a still camera is occasional. It's also important to realize that these cameras depreciate rapidly. My Nikon F/N80, a film camera that I retired last summer in favour of the D70, is probably worthless at this point, and I expect that my D70 will have no re-sale value within a couple of years. If I want to use film but the 4x5 is inconvenient, I use the Mamiya rangefinder. It weighs about the same, maybe even less, than the D70, and I love using it. I like the way it feels in my hands, I like the fact that it is manual, and I like the 6x7 negatives. The only observation that I'd make, which is either a negative or a positive depending on your point of view, is that I shoot with it with a lot more discipline than the D70. I print digitally, and good scans aren't cheap. I've used the D70 to test exposure and I think that it can be a very useful tool, especially if you take the time to learn how to read the histograms. Also, if you are able to hook the camera to a laptop, there is a Nikon programme that will let you see the results of an exposure on a computer screen (instead of the camera's rather small display) immediately.

Yes, although Markus makes an important distinction between a score and music that is inherent in the action, what he calls diegetic music, examples being Pauline at the Beach and Interiors. Has anyone heard Alex North's score for 2001? I gather that Kubrick dumped it in favour of Zarathustra. It's interesting that Woody Allen, himself an accomplished musician, would make a film with only about three minutes of diegetic music in it, and that it would be regarded by some people, myself among them, as his finest film. Leo, as far as I am concerned Prokofiev was a genius - amazing range, gorgeous melodies and I love the musical humour in his lighter compositions. No votes for the theme to The Pink Panther? I think that it is absolutely perfect for Clouseau/Sellers.

Woody Allen's Interiors has no music, including during the credits, with one exception. Near the end of the film, there is an engagement party during which the characters put on a record player, and dance to, two jazz instrumentals: Tommy Dorsey's Keepin' Out of Mischief Now and The World's Greatest Jazz Band's Wolverine Blues.

I just had a quick look at a couple of Eric Rohmer's films: L'amour, l'apres-midi (Chloe in the Afternoon). The only music appears to be a brief sequence of electronic music, by Arie Dzierlatke, in the opening credits. Pauline a la plage (Pauline at the Beach). No music in the credits, and the only music in the film, by Jean Louis Valero, is background music in a scene in a dance bar, and music from a record player, to which characters dance, in a couple of beach house scenes.

Picking up on another thread, can anyone think of fiction feature films that have no or little music? Did Louis Malle, in My Dinner with Andre, use Satie other than in the last few minutes? What about stage plays adapted for the screen? Certainly, the film versions of Tennessee Williams's plays aren't an example. The stage version of Glass Menagerie contained music by Paul Bowles, and Alex North did a jazz score for the film version of Streetcar. While we're at it, anyone have favourite film composers or favourite film scores?

Just watched this. Not deep, but worth seeing if it comes to your local cable network. It's a very French film, by which I mean that I don't think that it could have been made in the US. Lamche got access to everyone from Jeanne Moreau to Laetitia Casta, and his subjects speak quite freely about their role in French culture, as well as the connection between the film industry and the fashion industry (haute couture, cosmetics, perfume, luxury goods). It would be interesting to see someone air this film back-to-back with the PBS American Masters documentary on Richard Avedon, whose work with Chanel, along with that of Helmut Newton, is discussed in Lamche's film. I don't know how old Bardot and Deneuve are, but they sure look good.

Actually, the truth is simpler. I'm one of those people who are not a fan of this film and I couldn't resist an opportunity to say something irreverent about it.

There is a museum in a small town in New York state called Beacon that specializes in modern art. The museum is called the Dia:Beacon. In my view, it is one of the finest modern art museums in the world. Last summer, the Dia had an installation that consisted of a non-stop film, apparently recorded over 24 hours plus, by a camera that was mounted in an empty New York apartment. Having watched the film for about 30 minutes, I can tell you that the only thing that happened, while I was watching, was that a mouse scurried across the room. I guess that the apartment where they shot the film must have had a problem with mice. There is an important documentary filmmaker in the US called Frederick Wiseman. One of the most important things about his work is that he does not interfere with his subjects. He essentially plays the role of observer and just let's the camera roll. However, that is not how he shows his films. According to the current issue of American Cinematographer, he spends about eight months editing each of his documentaries. As much as I like the Dia:Beacon, I am not convinced that the film that I saw there is art. On the other hand, it is quite obvious to me that Mr. Wiseman's films, although the subject of extensive editing, are not fascist.

Well let me try a different interpretation... Space Odyssey is a horror film featuring a character called HAL, whom Kubrick expected would elicit an emotional response in anyone who is not brain dead. Stripped down, it is a film version of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, which in turn was a retelling of the myth of Prometheus. It is not, as far as I know, a didactic exercise in philosophy, thank God. One of the things that people like Shakespeare and Fielding and Sterne understood is that the job of a storteller is to tell a story, not to write a philosophical treatise. That is one of the reasons why Shakespeare's plays, like most great art, are open to many interpretations. He knew that great stories are inherently ambiguous, which is what makes multiple interpretations possible. Like all great storytellers, Shakespeare used the medium at his disposal, in his case live actors and words, to manipulate his audience both emotionally and intellectually. To take an example, and a deliberately controversial one, Shylock's principal speech in The Merchant of Venice is a masterpiece of emotional persuasion. At the same time, the play is clearly not, in my view, anti-semitic. There is no such thing as serious art that does not elicit an emotional response. That is true whether one is talking about images or music or words or all three. This statement is completely consistent with the creation of ambiguity. It follows that I think that Albert Camus should have stuck to writing works of philosophy and that John Steinbeck should have spent his time writing works of philosophy instead of novels. It also follows that I think that Bergman's Fanny and Alexander is a true masterpiece whereas I think that On the Waterfront, however wonderful Brando's performance was, is essentially a political diatribe, and that Days of Heaven is a beautifully photographed film that is pretty much devoid of content.

It seems to me that the underlying issue in this and many other threads is the role of ambiguity in film and other arts. Anyone who is interested in this issue is likely to learn plenty from reading a book by William Empson, first published in about 1930 and continuously in print ever since, called 7 Types of Ambiguity. As for music... As someone who plays the piano, I can't imagine playing a composition to which I neither have, nor convey, an emotional reponse. If one goes to a live concert to watch a soloist perform, whether a pianist or a violinist, one will see the response with one's own eyes. Concert soloists do not look like the Star Trek android Data. They are deeply engaged emotionally, and if they are good, their emotional response gets transferred to the audience. That is true whether they are playing Mozart or Stravinsky or Ligeti or Gershwin. If most concert performers are too "old fogey" for one's taste, go see a performance by Joshua Bell, and look at the sweat on his brow and back when he is finished. I don't understand someone who is immune from this, or wants to be, or who labels it a "con". Music is SUPPOSED to have emotional content. That content is determined by many factors. One way to understand, first hand, how it is done is to have a musician friend play a favourite melody in various major and minor keys and with various rhythms. Or listen to a couple of recordings of a song like Mack the Knife, one from a performance of Threepenny Opera, for which Brecht and Weill wrote the song, and one by Bobby Darrin - the experience is likely to be quite a revelation. As Robert Hughes says, the only real question is whether it is done well or badly.

No, that is not what the ASC is doing. Also, the "few dollars" to which you refer is US$50. Before elaborating further, I want to give the ASC and Zinio another day to respond to my e-mails. The ASC is pitching the digital version of its magazine as equivalent to, if not superior to, its print version. It is particularly targeting non-US subscribers: "Overseas subscribers save a bundle on postage." I and other non-US subscribers, as well as US subscribers who are considering the digital version, have an interest in knowing whether the statements that the ASC makes about its digital version are, substantively, true or false.

If you get the CBC, this sounds like fun: http://www.cbc.ca/passionateeyesunday/feature_120206.html The film, by Pascale Lamche, previously aired on the BBC and Arte, and features Brigitte Bardot, Jeanne Moreau, Catherine Deneuve, Juliette Binoche, Audrey Tautou, etc.

The film to which you are referring was actually shot in video. There is information on the film, including detailed technical information, at www.iraqinfragments.com

Sorry, but this isn't the point. My first concern is that I received a renewal letter that was, as far as I am concerned, a con. Let me add that the letter invited me to pay via phone, fax or mail. It did not invite the obvious, which was to pay directly over the ASC website. Having gone to the site, what did I discover? I discovered that the "special Clubhouse offer" was a fiction. Indeed, the best price offered in the "special Clubhouse offer" exceeded the best price on the website by 55 per cent. My second concern is that the ASC is promoting a form of subscription that, according to the ASC, facilitates access and archivability, but that actually appears to severely limit both. More importantly, the ASC is NOT transparent about this. Even if they were honest about the product, I don't get the policy. It isn't like the whole world is clamoring to get its hands on back issues of this magazine. With the caveat that I have not yet received confirmation from the ASC that my understanding of this product is correct, it should not take the better part of an hour of research to discover that this product may not be what it is represented to be. I don't question the sincerity of the ASC members. I prefer to think that the marketing has been contracted out and they don't know what is going on. Maybe they should find out.

I neither said nor implied that the ASC makes money. I think that when your staff send me a letter offering me a "special Clubhouse offer" to renew my subscription, and say that they are approaching me now because the problem on renewals is that people are away from home when a subscription comes up for renewal, it is disturbing that the price that I am offered turns out to be the same price offered to anyone who logs onto your website. I would like to think that ASC members and volunteers are not involved in this. More importantly, I would like to think that they would put a stop to this kind of marketing, because it is not only unworthy of the ASC, but borders on crooked. Actually, I'm being charitable. It doesn't border on crooked, it is crooked, and more importantly, from a non-profit organisation, it is dishonourable. When the ASC actually promotes the digital version of its magazine on the ground that it eases access and archivability, I do expect it to be clear about any limitations, especially when it appears that there may be major downsides to buying such a subscription. On this question, I'll refrain from saying anything else until I receive a response from the ASC about the consequences of buying this product. I'd be delighted if Martha responded to my e-mail and if AC, like other magazines using Zinio, was transparent on its website about the consequences of a digital subscription using the Zinio Reader. As a member of the ASC, you might want to ask why someone who has a couple of computers and changes computers once every year or two should be denied, within a couple of years, access to ASC magazines for which they have paid. Surely the demand for back issues can't be so high that subscribers should be denied what they have paid for.