Positive news from Fujifilm
Old 08-16-2018   #1
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Positive news from Fujifilm

We are living in strange times: Photographers spend thousands of Dollars, Pounds or Euros on 24, 35, 46 megapixel cameras.
And in 99% of the time they only view at them on computer monitors with only 2 or 4 MP.
How ridiculous, and what a waste of money....of course same for film photographers who only (let) scan their images (for lots of tmoney, time) and never printing them.
Viewing photos only on computer screens means having the lowest quality at the highest cost = worst price-performance ratio.

Therefore: "Activate" your megapixels (or film resolution) and get real prints!
Fujifilm is now promoting that: Making prints on real photo paper. On their traditional RA-4 silver-halide photo papers.

"The power of the printed image":
https://www.makeanoriginal.com/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpraQCpz8fE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su3TZAkzdyQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdSIfTDDdVM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI88LhwzhQY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CACRa9v12y8

Fujifilm has increased their R&D in their RA-4 silver-halide paper business and have introduced several new papers in the last years, e.g. for photobooks. They are running three RA-4 paper factories on three continents, more than their competitors together. They are by far market leader in RA-4.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2018   #2
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Fujifilm earns more revenue and income from their photo chemical business than from their digital cameras!
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2018   #3
Jake Mongey
Registered User
 
Jake Mongey's Avatar
 
Jake Mongey is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Age: 19
Posts: 476
From printing RA4 in the darkroom Fuji is really the ONLY option as they are the only company who cut their paper into sheets. In my situation and many others its near impossible/ very difficult to cut down any other papers which come in rolls in the dark.

It is interesting though how heavily they are actually invested in the paper though. I mean during my finals at college the majority of people got C types done on kodak endura papers from a lab despite having some decent inkjet printers in college. There is simply a higher prestige amongst photographers for actual chemical prints as opposed to Ink on a piece of paper. Thanks for sharing this, was good to look at and read.
__________________
Should probably spend less time talking more time shooting but unfortunately I dont have to leave my desk to talk
www.jmongeyphoto.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2018   #4
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Fujifilm earns more revenue and income from their photo chemical business than from their digital cameras!
Correct.
Their Photo Division is called "Imaging Solutions".
It has two sub-divisions:
1. "Photo Imaging". That is mainly the traditional silver-halide business: RA-4 photo paper, photo finishing (mini-labs), standard film, instant film, instant cameras, single-use cameras, photo chemistry. But also inkjet belongs to it.
It is responsible for 69% (!) of the whole revenue of "Imaging Solutions".
2. "Optical Device and Electronic Imaging": That are digital cameras and smartphone lenses. Only 31% of the revenue are from that sub-division.

But there is also X-Ray film as a silver-halide product, which belongs to a different division.

In the fiscal year 2016/2017 this mainly silver-halide "Photo Imaging" group made about 2.12 billion dollars revenue!
For comparison: Eastman Kodak, Kodak Alaris, Ilford, Foma, Lucky, Adox, Bergger, Film Ferrania together made less than 300 millions with their silver-halide products in the same period.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2018   #5
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake Mongey View Post
From printing RA4 in the darkroom Fuji is really the ONLY option as they are the only company who cut their paper into sheets. In my situation and many others its near impossible/ very difficult to cut down any other papers which come in rolls in the dark.
Cutting color paper from rolls is not so difficult. There are cutters for that. Lots of home darkroom users use them. RA-4 paper from rolls is incredibly cheap!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake Mongey View Post
It is interesting though how heavily they are actually invested in the paper though. I mean during my finals at college the majority of people got C types done on kodak endura papers from a lab despite having some decent inkjet printers in college. There is simply a higher prestige amongst photographers for actual chemical prints as opposed to Ink on a piece of paper. Thanks for sharing this, was good to look at and read.
The market for RA-4 is huge: Lots of big mass volume labs are using RA-4 as main medium, because the price-performance ratio is unsurpassed.

Yes, real silver-halide prints - BW and color - are more appreciated and mostly get more value than inkjet prints in the art world / galleries.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-16-2018   #6
joeswe
Registered User
 
joeswe is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake Mongey View Post
From printing RA4 in the darkroom Fuji is really the ONLY option as they are the only company who cut their paper into sheets. In my situation and many others its near impossible/ very difficult to cut down any other papers which come in rolls in the dark.
I am not sure if Fuji really cut their paper. At least around here you can get cut paper from both Fuji and Kodak but neither company cuts their own paper, it's all cut by third party. OTOH, if you need to print on Kodak paper, cutting sheets from rolls really aint such a big problem unless you intend to cut 5x7 sheets from roll 20 inch wide. Rolls are also substantially (!) cheaper than cut paper.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-17-2018   #7
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Correct.
Their Photo Division is called "Imaging Solutions".
It has two sub-divisions:
1. "Photo Imaging". That is mainly the traditional silver-halide business: RA-4 photo paper, photo finishing (mini-labs), standard film, instant film, instant cameras, single-use cameras, photo chemistry. But also inkjet belongs to it.
It is responsible for 69% (!) of the whole revenue of "Imaging Solutions".
2. "Optical Device and Electronic Imaging": That are digital cameras and smartphone lenses. Only 31% of the revenue are from that sub-division.

But there is also X-Ray film as a silver-halide product, which belongs to a different division.

In the fiscal year 2016/2017 this mainly silver-halide "Photo Imaging" group made about 2.12 billion dollars revenue!
For comparison: Eastman Kodak, Kodak Alaris, Ilford, Foma, Lucky, Adox, Bergger, Film Ferrania together made less than 300 millions with their silver-halide products in the same period.
As a highly successful and diversified company, it seems highly logical that film's best future would have been in Fuji's hands. Sadly, that is not turning out to be the case and so we are left with future scenarios that have a lot of hope in them that may not be justified or realized.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-17-2018   #8
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,948
The re-introduction of Acros, to me, would be a positive from Fujifilm. But I ain't holding my breath waiting for it.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-17-2018   #9
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,777
I used Costco for prints for years, and they use Crystal Achieve papers. It is wet printed after laser exposure. They have both matte and luster. I am pleased with these prints. But I wish they would make a true Black and White paper. Some labs offer this but there are a few that are not as consistent as I would like.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-17-2018   #10
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by css9450 View Post
The re-introduction of Acros, to me, would be a positive from Fujifilm. But I ain't holding my breath waiting for it.
Fujifilm had at one time a fully fleshed out film product line. They should have standardized on the following:

Neopan 1600
Neopan 400
Acros 100

400H
160NS
Superia 200,400,1600

Provia 100, 400
Velvia 50

Available in 135 & 120, plus various LF sizes.

This product line, attached to a fully profitable company that was highly diversified, would have given film a possible 100 year extension on life. Instead, we have clear evidence that Fujifilm is exiting from the vast majority of its films. A real shame.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-17-2018   #11
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 3,976
Film production is only viable for a company that large, with that much diversity, on a very large scale. All the still photographers in the world can't make up for the loss in motion picture production and print distribution which is where the economy of scale came into play. Small companies like Ilford, Ferrania, Adox, and whomever else by whatever name have only done smaller batches of still film. Ferrania may be introducing an E6 film for motion picture but we'll see if that ever pans out. The only way film production and use could have been secured for another 100 years is if we eliminated digital capture, production and print distribution in motion pictures. Still film has always been almost a courtesy by Fuji and Kodak who used to supply the entire production of a film through distribution to every theater. One 2 hour movie from initial filming, through post then distribution to every theater in north America alone would eclipse the entire still photography use of the entire world on any day since motion pictures became popular.
Saying that a massive multinational corporation could have kept up a profitable film production with that many lines of product without the motion picture industry is absolutely untrue. There is no way, unless acetate and silver were completely free of cost, this could be done.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #12
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
I used Costco for prints for years, and they use Crystal Achieve papers. It is wet printed after laser exposure. They have both matte and luster. I am pleased with these prints. But I wish they would make a true Black and White paper. Some labs offer this but there are a few that are not as consistent as I would like.
Ilford offers a special BW silver-halide paper optimised for laser exposure. And some excellent labs offer that. Most use Lamda or Lightjet laser exposure machines for that.
But the Ilford labs in Mobberley, UK, and in the US (Swan Labs - The Darkroom) use modified small Fuji Frontier mini lab printers for that.

But that market is very very small, unfortunately. Probably too small for such a huge manufacturer like Fujifilm. They are producing their RA-4 silver halide color papers in three factories on three continents. And they make more than 200 million of mē of it every year. This market is gigantic.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #13
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
The only way film production and use could have been secured for another 100 years is if we eliminated digital capture, production and print distribution in motion pictures.
That is a myth permanently repeated by people with very little knowledge of the current film industry.
Fujifilm don't need motion picture film production to keep their film factory in Japan running. Because with instant film they have a mass volume product (dozens of million film packs every year) which is even bigger than their former motion picture business.
And for Kodak: In a film revival the market for photo film film demand is growing. Improves the capacity situation in their Building 38 film plant. I wouldn't be surprised if in the coming years running B38 could be possible without or with very little movie film production (as the print movie film production for cinema copies is already almost gone).
And all the others like Ilford, Foma, Adox, Film Ferrania etc. don't need movie film production, they have never been in that market.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #14
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
Film production is only viable for a company that large, with that much diversity, on a very large scale. All the still photographers in the world can't make up for the loss in motion picture production and print distribution which is where the economy of scale came into play. Small companies like Ilford, Ferrania, Adox, and whomever else by whatever name have only done smaller batches of still film. Ferrania may be introducing an E6 film for motion picture but we'll see if that ever pans out. The only way film production and use could have been secured for another 100 years is if we eliminated digital capture, production and print distribution in motion pictures. Still film has always been almost a courtesy by Fuji and Kodak who used to supply the entire production of a film through distribution to every theater. One 2 hour movie from initial filming, through post then distribution to every theater in north America alone would eclipse the entire still photography use of the entire world on any day since motion pictures became popular.
Saying that a massive multinational corporation could have kept up a profitable film production with that many lines of product without the motion picture industry is absolutely untrue. There is no way, unless acetate and silver were completely free of cost, this could be done.

Phil Forrest
Ilford- Does not own the land that they operate on. Uncertain future.
Ferrania- Has 6 employees. Uncertain future.
Adox- Does not make any general purpose films. Building out their capabilities. Hopefully an expanded product line in future.
Fujifilm- Discontinuing films at an accelerated rate. Uncertain future.
Kokdak- Requires an enormous reorganization to have any hope of financial viability. Uncertain future.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #15
miha
Registered User
 
miha is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
And all the others like Ilford, Foma, Adox, Film Ferrania etc. don't need movie film production, they have never been in that market.
Oh come on, I'm sure you are aware of Type 612 and 512 (HP5 PLUS and FP4 PLUS) motion picture films from a not too distant past and the famous Ferrania camera films from the 60s and 70s. They also plan to offer their future slide films in such formats. I don't know if the old ADOX /DuPont ever produced motion film but the current ADOX company offer such film in Super 8 cassettes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #16
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 3,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by miha View Post
Oh come on, I'm sure you are aware of Type 612 and 512 (HP5 PLUS and FP4 PLUS) motion picture films from a not too distant past and the famous Ferrania camera films from the 60s and 70s. They also plan to offer their future slide films in such formats. I don't know if the old ADOX /DuPont ever produced motion film but the current ADOX company offer such film in Super 8 cassettes.
Point taken but these small companies, with the exception of Ilford only really have the name of their older original company. Most are completely different after several rounds of restructuring, not unlike today's Voigtlander.
The fact that anyone of the small companies or even Kodak, make Super 8 film is not even a factor. The Super 8 cassette is the equivalent to about two 36 exposure rolls of 35mm film and S8 is so uncommonly used by a niche within a niche, that it is a statistical blip in the whole production of film.
That said, my point still stands that for large volume, diverse production of film within a company like Kodak or Fuji, the motion picture industry must be involved and in the future, they won't. Then again, maybe the shareholders of Fuji would be so generous as to create a large portfolio of film products as a courtesy to a small percentage of photographers and do it at a loss.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #17
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Ilford- Does not own the land that they operate on. Uncertain future.
No, not a uncertain future. They have a long-term contract with their landlord. And if the plans for the complete new factory there can't be implemented, continuing this contract is the only option for the landlord to earn money at all. Therefore Ilford is in an excellent position. Much much better than their landlord. That is one of the reasons why their strategic investor made the long-term investment in Ilford.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Ferrania- Has 6 employees. Uncertain future.
They have more employees. Of course every start-up has risks. But so far they've come wider than all of their critics thought. In September normal operation starts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Adox- Does not make any general purpose films.
Wrong. Silvermax is a general purpose film. Even more "general purpose" than FP4+ or Fomapan 100, as Silvermax is more versatile, can also be used as BW reversal film in addition to its negative film use. CHS 100 II will be, too. And they are offering a complete line of excellent quality photo chemistry and BW papers, and further darkroom products.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Fujifilm- Discontinuing films at an accelerated rate. Uncertain future.
Wrong. Just recently they have introduced new 3-Packs for C200 and Superia 400. And additional instant film types and cameras.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #18
FPjohn
Registered User
 
FPjohn's Avatar
 
FPjohn is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 1,641
What are the characteristics of the Instax fiim independent of its role in the instant format? Is it potentially a viable 800 ASA noninstant fiim or a known preexisting product?

yours
FPJ
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #19
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
No, not a uncertain future. They have a long-term contract with their landlord. And if the plans for the complete new factory there can't be implemented, continuing this contract is the only option for the landlord to earn money at all. Therefore Ilford is in an excellent position. Much much better than their landlord. That is one of the reasons why their strategic investor made the long-term investment in Ilford.

They have more employees. Of course every start-up has risks. But so far they've come wider than all of their critics thought. In September normal operation starts.

Wrong. Silvermax is a general purpose film. Even more "general purpose" than FP4+ or Fomapan 100, as Silvermax is more versatile, can also be used as BW reversal film in addition to its negative film use. CHS 100 II will be, too. And they are offering a complete line of excellent quality photo chemistry and BW papers, and further darkroom products.

Wrong. Just recently they have introduced new 3-Packs for C200 and Superia 400. And additional instant film types and cameras.
Ilford does not have a long term contract. You are misinformed.

Ferrania does not have more than 6 people. You are misinformed.

Fujifilm has not released a new non-INSTAX film. You are misinformed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #20
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by miha View Post
Oh come on, I'm sure you are aware of Type 612 and 512 (HP5 PLUS and FP4 PLUS) motion picture films from a not too distant past
Yes, I know. But the production of these were tiny in comparison to the photo films at Ilford. And since its new start in 2004 / 2005 motion picture film did not play any significant role for Ilford. They just don't need it, nor are they interested in it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miha View Post
and the famous Ferrania camera films from the 60s and 70s.
And in the 80ies, 90ies, early 00ies Film Ferrania did very well without any motion picture business. It was not needed. Film Ferrania was successful with concentrating on photo film. And with that they could run their huge factory at full capacity.
That you always need motion picture film to run big film factories is simply wrong!
The big film factory of Agfa in West-Germany (Leverkusen) never did any motion picture film coating, nor did the European Fujifilm factory in Tilburg, Netherlands! Same was valid for the Kodak film factories in Europe. And Forte.
The film factories of Konica and Lucky also never did motion picture film production!

Quote:
Originally Posted by miha View Post
They also plan to offer their future slide films in such formats.
But not real motion picture film. Just S8 and 16mm for enthusiasts. And it's reversal film, not negative film which is used in the movie film business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by miha View Post
I don't know if the old ADOX /DuPont ever produced motion film but the current ADOX company offer such film in Super 8 cassettes.
But they don't need that at all to make their photo film production running. I've discussed that with them last year on a photo fair. They clearly said that motion picture film does not play any siginificant role for photo film production. Photo film production is independant now and will be even more in the future.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #21
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Ilford does not have a long term contract. You are misinformed.
No, you are. I've talked to them at Photokina. The land contract isn't a problem at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Ferrania does not have more than 6 people. You are misinformed.
No, you are. They have six currently in production operation, but more in total with administration, distribution, marketing and shareholders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Fujifilm has not released a new non-INSTAX film. You are misinformed.
I've written they have introduced new 3-Packs. You don't do that if you have the intention to pull the plug.

Last edited by Skiff : 08-18-2018 at 06:40. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #22
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by FPjohn View Post
What are the characteristics of the Instax fiim independent of its role in the instant format? Is it potentially a viable 800 ASA noninstant fiim or a known preexisting product?

yours
FPJ
Instant film has a negative film base. And that is coated like other films on the same machinery. So with these huge mass volume amount of films Fujifilm can use their emulsion and coating machines to full or high capacity. That helps to keeps the lines in their film factory running.
And probably there are some technology transfer effects in R&D. The same is valid for RA-4 paper. In the end it is all color silver-halide technology. Fujifilm has increased their R&D budget for color paper in the last years. Resulting in new products like silver-halide paper for photo books or new paper surfaces and increased color stability.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #23
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,123
Argue whatever you want but from my perspective film is doing quite well.

About 10 years ago, while in my mid-50s, I was pretty certain that I would live to see film completely die out with the possible exception of a few very small cottage businesses producing and selling a very expensive product.

Now, in my mid-60s, it would appear that film is growing and will outlive me quite handily. Digital, with the obvious exception of cell phones, seems to be the market that is struggling.

But, there is no constant but change. Who knows what we will find tomorrow?
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #24
maryland_fotos
Registered User
 
maryland_fotos is online now
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 728
Reading most of the posts on this thread maybe Skiff should edit his thread title to "Negative news..."
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #25
FPjohn
Registered User
 
FPjohn's Avatar
 
FPjohn is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 1,641
Film and vinyl. Durable analog.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #26
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by FPjohn View Post
Film and vinyl. Durable analog.
It is infinitely easier to manufacture vinyl records profitably than it is to make film. The analogy is false.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #27
maigo
Registered User
 
maigo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Posts: 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
It is infinitely easier to manufacture vinyl records profitably than it is to make film. The analogy is false.
He said durable, not easier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
---------------------------------
My Flickr Photostream
My Flickr Albums
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #28
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,650
Mods, could the title of this thread be corrected, please? “Negative News From Ted Striker” would be more accurate, I think. TIA.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2018   #29
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 3,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
Mods, could the title of this thread be corrected, please? “Negative News From Ted Striker” would be more accurate, I think. TIA.
+1
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:42.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.