View Full Version : T Max 400 ULF- What Are You Waiting For?

Michael Kadillak
13-Jan-2006, 20:50
I was in touch with John at J&C today and he informed me that the orders received to date for the T Max 400 ULF offering is lukewarm. What are you waiting for?

In order to avail ourselves of the standard high priced Special Kodak Order and to get Kodak to consider cutting T Max 400 in ULF sizes, we needed to get their attention by purchasing an entire master roll. Encouraged by the interest expressed from the ULF community to put T Max 400 into the film holders of the ULF shooter, we invested a year of our time to secure terms and pricing that we have the opportunity to take advantage of as we speak. When we pre-notified the ULF/LF community of our success in climbing this mountain, we received tremendous interest in this project that encouraged us to set up the payment vehicle at:


I honestly felt that folks would be absolutely chomping at the bit at this opportunity and so far, that is not proved to be the case. . Come on fellow sheet film users, help us out here. We opted to act in the best interests of the entire ULF/LF community when we could have negotiated a deal for a handful of participants.

Considering the cost of a master roll of any film, the willing underwriter (J&C) needs our commitment in the form of actual film orders to offset a reasonable portion of the financial exposure to make this deal work. Without every interested person downloading the payment forms and committing to the largest commitment of this film possible, there is a real risk that this deal could not come to fruition.

Why? Unlike the Ilford offering that is being fronted by the manufacturer, J&C is stepping up BIG TIME to fund the purchase of the master roll but cannot (and should not) be asked to accept the entire financial exposure for this deal. Our participation as a group of sheet film users in the form of real orders is absolutely essential to offset a reasonable portion of the cost of this deal.

A tactical strategy in insuring that we have quality sheet film in the future is to take an offensive posture and convey to the film manufactuers that we are in fact a ready willing and stable market now and in the future. Given what we felt was the interest in T Max 400 that is exactly what we did with Kodak. To allow this offering to fail for a fundamental lack of participation would be absolutely devistating to the prospects of the future for ULF sheet film. It would make us as consumers completely reliant upon 50 year old film plants in Eastern and that does not set well with me one bit.

Help us help you and secure the prospects of participating in this marvelous art form for years to come - step up to the plate and send your order form to J&C.


Matt Miller
13-Jan-2006, 21:11
I'm not a ULF shooter, just 3x4 & 8x10. I noticed the other day that 3x4 is on the list, so I ordered some. There are no other options for a 400 speed film in 3x4. This is very cool, I hope that it comes to fruition.

Buy up guys.

Oren Grad
13-Jan-2006, 22:42
My big order will go to Ilford, but I've already sent John an order for 3x4 TMY as well.

Robert A. Zeichner
14-Jan-2006, 05:45
I sent my check in over a week ago and I know of one other individual who did the same. I will contact the rest of the folks I informed of this program and encourage them to do likewise if they haven't already. Failure is not an option here. We now have to step up with $$$ or we may never get this chance again. Michael, thanks for the update.

14-Jan-2006, 05:55

I will send my 100 sheets of 7x17 order soon.

It just a little tough since everything is happening at the same time. I am in the middle of organizing the group purchase of Palladium Chloride and trying to buy $800 worth of chemicals for myself... I just wish I had more time to be financially ready. Then I would be able to order more. A month is not enough time to get ready for people like me. I think this will be a key point next time this is happening.

Regardless, I hope it will go through. I appreciate time and effort you are putting into this matter.


Diane Maher
14-Jan-2006, 07:07
I think part of the problem with all of these wonderful ULF offerings is the timing. January is typically a month where people are trying to let their credit cards cool off after the holidays. I have also placed an order with Ilford and will do so again before their deadline - mostly because I've never shot with T-Max 400 extensively. However, I think it's great that these offers are being made.

14-Jan-2006, 07:20
It also says "No refunds" on their info page. Does that mean if I prepay and the order never comes to fruition that I'm out my money?


Bob Eskridge
14-Jan-2006, 07:32
I'm ordering! I'm ordering! Just haven't taken the time!

JandC Photo
14-Jan-2006, 07:52
"It also says "No refunds" on their info page. Does that mean if I prepay and the order never comes to fruition that I'm out my money? "

Nobody will be charged on their credit card until we reach the minimum.

From the info page:

"We will authorize your credit card upon receipt of the order. Once we meet the minimum order volume to place the order with Kodak we will charge your card for your order. "

Checks will be cashed upon receipt. We will refund if the minimum is not met.


Michael Mutmansky
14-Jan-2006, 08:20
I was discussing the Kodak special order with a person recently, and he mentioned that the language indicates that if enough preorders are not made, then this special purchase will not happen, and of course, the money will not be charged to the card.

However, one thing that he indicated is that he is concerned that he may lose out on ordering ANY film because of this possibility; if the Kodak order falls through he will have lost the possibility of putting in an order on Ilford film due to the timing.

This is part of the reason the timing of these two offers is extremely unfortunate, and could possibly be a reason that some people are hesitant to order the Kodak products. Is there a way to adjust the timing so that people can know before the Ilford deadline whether the Kodak order will fail? Some people, probably many people, are not going to be purchasing film from both companies for various reasons, and if a person commits to a Kodak purchase and then gets left out of the Ilford purchase due to the timing, then they may be in really poor shape as far as film goes.


Oren Grad
14-Jan-2006, 09:09
Per Michael Mutmansky's point, the Ilford order period extends to Jan 25, while the JandC/TMY period extends to Jan 30.

So far, nobody has been willing to talk about just how large the orders need to be for, on the one hand, the current JandC/TMY promotion to be a success, and on the other, for Ilford to conclude that they've sold enough to make it worthwhile for them to do it again. This is understandable on one level - it could be considered sensitive business information. But along with the overlap of the two offers, it makes it very difficult for the purchaser to know what to do in order to maximize the odds of having a high-quality film not just next month, but also next year. My greatest fear is that the consequence of this lack of transparency will be that both ventures fail for lack of a critical mass.

I hope there is some way that the two vendors can offer a bit more guidance. In any case, even if they don't, I hope that everyone with any interest in these formats will step up to the plate here and place an order with their preferred vendor.

JandC Photo
14-Jan-2006, 09:23
Kodak has made a binding commitment to produce the film if we place the order with them. As Michael has stated the purchase is for an entire master roll cut into whatever sizes we ask of Kodak (within reason, there has to be enough demand of a given size to be able to cut it efficiently without a lot of waste). There is a certain volume of pre orders that will allow us to feel confident that our investment in this is sound. I agree that it is unfortunate that these two offerings are occurring at this time and in January after the holidays. However, we've been working this deal with Kodak for nearly a year and it's just how it worked out. It was not planed that way. The easiest way to solve the problem mentioned above is to place your orders before the Ilford deadline. If we achieve the critical mass before the Ilford deadline then we will announce it and you can be assured that the film will be made.

Also keep in mind that there is no guarantee on the Ilford side beyond this current offering. If they determine that the ULF market is too small to do a custom cutting even twice a year they could abandon this project too. Cutting an entire master roll at once has efficiency to it. Cutting small orders is much less efficient and results in more cost and waste. Ilford will do what's best for Ilford in deciding how to proceed with their future ULF offerings.

In case anyone thinks we have something against Ilford I just want to say that last week we became an Ilford dealer, will be carrying their products and plan to participate in any future ULF offering.


Michael Mutmansky
14-Jan-2006, 09:29

I agree with you 100%. I am a bit concerned that the Kodak order won't happen, and I'm a bit concerned that some of the sizes of the Ilford order won't happen as well. Since nobody is willing to talk about the minimums required, or the monetary committment necessary, we really don't have any clue whether this is all a pipe dream or not.

For Ilford, I'm certain that at least some of the sizes will happen, but some of the more esoteric sizes may not reach the critical mass to go. Since we don't know what the threshold is, we may not know how far off the minimum a paticular size is. The same goes for Kodak, but in this case, it is an all-or-nothing proposition.

Finally, I appreciate the position that J&C is taking in this, but remember, with the risk comes the spoils. This is not a non-profit effort on their part, and even at the pricing for the pre-orders, I'm sure a certain profit is built into the pricing. While I agree that the photographers who wish film like this to be availble need to step up RIGHT NOW, I don't particularly like the implication that the risk needs to be on the shoulders of the photographers as it is if the Kodak order falls through and there's no time to place an order for Ilford film.


JandC Photo
14-Jan-2006, 09:32
I can't speak for what Ilford considers enough volume. I can tell you that a master roll of Kodak T-Max costs well over $100,000. A commitment from users to offset a significant part of this cost is what is required. I don't know what the exact number is. There probably isn't an exact number. But this should give people an idea of the ballpark we're playing in.


Michael Mutmansky
14-Jan-2006, 09:37

You posted while I was typing...

What you need to do is not make an announcement that the Kodak order is going to happen, but make an announcement that the Kodak order IS NOT going to happen, and do it with enough time for people to fall back to Ilford for their film order. That's the only way for the people who are placking pre-orders with your are protected from not having any film to shoot. This means that you have to project the pre-orders out to the final pre-order day and essentially make a statement that you will stand behind (thus assuming a certain amount of risk).

As I see it, that's the only way you can make the group of potential customers comfortable that they will not be left in the cold.

It may be too late for some people; they may have already made the decision to go with Ilford due to the uncertainty.


JandC Photo
14-Jan-2006, 09:51
If I make an announcement that the order is going to happen before the Ilford deadline than everyone knows that their order is placed. Since our ordering period goes out to the end of the month I can't very well announce it's not going to happen before then. I'm sure there are people who are budgeting their finances based on this deadline. Changing it now to a week earlier would not be fair to them. Given the situation that is the best I can do.

People seem to have some idea that there is a lot of profit to be made on this deal and that it is somehow commensurate to the risk. If there was a lot of money to be made on such a deal the main line dealers would have done it a long time ago. Any corporate bean counter looking at the risk to reward ratio of this deal would kill it off in an instant.

Marco Annaratone
14-Jan-2006, 13:17

do I understand that it is *OK* to order from Europe and you will deliver to Europe (for a shipment cost to be determined)?

Also, what is the expected (or most probable) expiration of the film? I may not have a freezer for a while so this info is important to me.


Rob Vinnedge
14-Jan-2006, 13:40
Michael and John,

I am going to order at least 100 sheets (10 boxes) of both 14X17 and 16X20 before the end of the month. I'm peddling my beautiful, pristine 5X7 Linhof Technika V on Ebay this very minute in order to do so. It has 6 hours to go. If it doesn"t sell, I'll go to plan B as fast as I can.

JandC Photo
14-Jan-2006, 17:34

Overseas orders are no problem.

The film will be cut from a fresh roll of T-Max 400. I would expect the expiration to be at least 3-4 years out. In addition, this film seems to keep pretty well so I wouldn't worry too much even at 5 years out.


Matt Miller
14-Jan-2006, 17:48

Is there any way that 8x10 can be included in this master roll cut? I'm sure that would help things out quite a bit.

JandC Photo
14-Jan-2006, 19:02

8x10 is a standard Kodak size which we carry. The price of 8x10 from Kodak to dealers is lower than what it would cost to have it cut from the master roll. This is due to the economies of scale Kodak gets in cutting and boxing several master rolls at once of the same size. This is very cost efficient as 8x10 and 4x5 fit perfectly in the dimensions of a master roll and result in very little waste. Because we're cutting multiple sizes in relatively small quantities the cost per square foot of film is higher for these special cuts. So we would lose money trying to sell special cut 8x10 film at the going rate for 8x10 from the current vendors.

I had a talk with Kodak on Friday regarding the cutting. Using our initial projections of sizes and quantities they had a couple of engineers working for quite some time trying to map this all out in a manner that would be most efficient. It's interesting listening to the thought process that goes into making all the cuts required to turn almost a mile of film into little sheets.


Arthur Nichols
15-Jan-2006, 07:26
This timing problem between the Iford and Kodak orders is difficult to deal with. At this point I would prefer to place a substantial order for the Kodak product, however if the deal does not go through then I have missed both the Kodak and Ilford order. I would like to suggest that Ilford extent the deadline on their order until after the deadline for the Kodak order. It doesn't seem to me that it should present any unsurmountable problems for Ilford to extend their offering for another couple of weeks. It has the potential to create a substantial increase in the size of their order if the Kodak deal doesn' work . If other members of this forum agree with me on this, maybe we can make a groug petition to Ilford.

Rob Vinnedge
15-Jan-2006, 11:25
I just happened to notice that Freestyle, one of the Ilford ULF outlets, is making an offer for a second run of Ilford ULF film in July for delivery in October. Maybe that relieves the pressure for those who want both types of film.

steve simmons
16-Jan-2006, 09:05
I hope this effort succeeds. However, I do have some concerns about how this effort has been handled. I have also been periodically accused of being biased against JandC and I would like to address this issue as well.

I helped promote the Ilford ULF effort because Ilford contacted me and provided me with the information about their film offering. Prior to the offering neither Kodak, Michael or JandC give me any advance notice at all. Ilford also mage their own efforts at publicizing their effort by contacting dealers and a variety of photo groups. To the best of my knowledge JandC made no such effort. Instead they have expected this entire effort, and the resulting financial commitment, to be carried by this forum and APUG. Now that this is not happening as quickly as they want guilt is being thrown around.IMHO this was naïve and unfair. Now, if this effort fails Kodak will come away thinking that the ULF community is not worth supporting. A much larger and more complete marketing plan should have been developed and carried out.

The fact is View Camera has made numerous efforts over the last year to communicate with Jand C to get info about their film offerings, quantities, etc. If anyone should be concerned about View Camera’s bias it should be Kodak, Fuji and Ilford because we work much harder and longer to get information out of Jand C than we do with them.

The large format community needs to work as a cohesive unit and not as a fractured set of parallel groups.

Just my thoughts

Steve simmons

Struan Gray
16-Jan-2006, 12:29
That's a pretty deft kick to the goolies Steve. Bravo for not going along with all that wishy-washy let's all be friends milketoast nonsense. For a moment there I thought we were going to have a sensible and adult resolution of a delicate problem everyone would prefer did not exist.

steve simmons
16-Jan-2006, 13:37
I just think this effort could have been handled better to increase the liklihood for success. It is a professional disagreement. Nothing personal. No names were called, no locker room slurs, etc., etc. If this effort succeeds we are all better off.

steve simmons

Michael Kadillak
16-Jan-2006, 13:56
If you go back Steve and look at prior posts on this subject that go back over a year, you will see that John and I have been very open and professional in letting everywhere on this forum and over at APUG know that we have been working very hard behind the scenes on this project.

As is always the case with highly entrupreunerial projects (trying to get Kodak to so something that has never been attempted let alone actually get it done) the probability of success is less than 1% until it actually comes to fruition. As a result, it did not make sense to prematurely get peoples hopes up until we had it all nailed down. In this regard, both the Kodak and Ilford deal were both common knowledge within the active internet discussion groups.

I will let John speak for himself in this regard but we felt that reaching to the ULF consumers directly along with personal calls to Fred Newman at the View Camera as a possible re-seller was the prudent and responsible thing to do. View Camera magazine is a highly delayed venue and not the place for time sensitive information of this nature because things can (and will) change on a dime. Plus we were being very respectful of the fact that you have a myriad of other things on your plate. Don't take it personally, we are reaching out in the best way we know how.


JandC Photo
18-Jan-2006, 16:59
We are now carrying the Ilford special order ULF sheet film as an authorized Ilford ULF dealer.


Some additional sizes are included and the offer date has been changed to February 6th.

To those who were concerned that the T-max offer might not go through and then it would be too late to order the Ilford this is not an issue any more thanks to Ilford.

Oren Grad
19-Jan-2006, 10:28
Update to the terms of the Ilford offer now officially posted here:

www.ilford.com/html/us_english/ILFOPRO/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7072 (http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/ILFOPRO/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7072)

Kerry L. Thalmann
19-Jan-2006, 10:44
Wow, Ilford is offering about every size imaginable except 4x10. That does seem a bit strange as there are at least four companies currently making 4x10 cameras, but nobody currently making anything in several of the other sizes included in this offer. 4x10 holders are also adily available, in stock and affordable compared to other non-standard sizes.

It is also unfortunate for people like me who wish to use the same film to shoot multiple formats (4x10 and 7x17 in my case). I know I can cut my own down from 8x10, but since they are going to all the trouble to cut all these other sizes, I'd sure like to see them offer 4x10 so I don't have the hassle and potential for dust and scratching when cutting my own.


Ralph Barker
19-Jan-2006, 12:38
Kerry - my guess would be that not enough people expressed an interest in 4x10 for it to make its way onto the list. They might still be able to add that size, however, if enough folks are interested. I'd suggest making Ilford aware of the interest, either via e-mail or through the Ilfopro forum.

Ilfopro ULF forum (http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/ILFOPRO/forum/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=27)

Kerry L. Thalmann
19-Jan-2006, 14:45

I did let Simon Galley (the Ilford/Harman rep) know of my interest in 4x10 (as did at least one other person) over on the APUG forum a couple weeks ago. Simon agreed to look into it, but I never received a response. Perhaps I need to remind them of my interest in the 4x10 format on the Ilfopro forum. Thanks for the link.

And as far as interest goes... I realize 4x10 is a specialty format, not exactly mainstream, but I can't imagine it is less popular than several of the other formats they are supporting. As I stated, there are currently four makers of 4x10 cameras (Canham, Lotus, Wisnr and Alt) and 4x10 holders are readily available and relatively affordable ($95 each for new Canham 4x10 holders, compared to $250 - $500 each for most of the other non-standard formats they are supporting). When was the last time (other than a custom-made, special order, one-of-a-kind camera) anybody offered cameras for sale in the 7x11 or 6½x8½ formats? I'm guessing around 1935. Don't get me wrong, I think those are lovely formats and I also think it's great that Ilford is supporting them, but I can't see how there could possibly be higher demand for film in those sizes than in 4x10.

Add in the fact that 4x10 FP4+ and HP5+ were standard Ilford catalog items (no special order, no minimum quantity) less than ten years ago, and the lack of 4x10 support seems even more baffling. Obviously, they have the ability to cut film in this size and somebody must be buying those 4x10 cameras and holders. Maybe the 4x10 shooters just need to stand up and be counted. I'll do my part by letting them know (again) of my interest.


Oren Grad
19-Jan-2006, 14:56
Kerry - do speak up again. I doubt that anyone at Ilford has a gripe with 4x10 - I'm sure it's just that they're fielding demands for all sorts of things just now and have their hands full trying to stay on top of it all. You might try emailing Steve Coomber at Ilford USA - he has been very helpful in responding to my queries.

Kerry L. Thalmann
19-Jan-2006, 15:20

Thanks. I just posted my appeal for 4x10 Ilford films on the Ilfopro ULF Forum (see Ralph's link above) and asked others to respond. Interestingly, in a thread from last November (when Ilford first started considering this special production run), 4x10 was one of the most requested formats. Somehow, it seems to have fallen through the cracks. It may be too late to get it added to the current production run, but perhaps if enough people show an interest, it will be included the next time around.


Juergen Sattler
19-Jan-2006, 16:40
I find it interesting that we complain all the time about film disappearing and certain sizes not being available, but when one of us goes out of his way and teams with a distributor to convince Kodak to make a special run for us, we don't seem to be willing to live up to our prior committment. I think that the Ilford vs. Kodak issue is not a real one - we all have our preferred film vendors and it would only be logical to put in a large order of Kodak if that's what you were using all the time. I am not a ULF user (I do 4x5 and 8x10) but I almost regret that I am not - just to help Michael and J&C out - this is a sad story......

Kerry L. Thalmann
25-Jan-2006, 10:27
From the Cafe Ilfopro ULF Forum: I e-mailed my Ilford contact about the 4x10 question, and recieved the following:

"I think the answer is that 4x10 will be considered for future production runs but not for this current one."

So, it looks like 4x10 users will need to cut their own from 8x10 for a while longer.

T Max 400, here I come. I was having a hard time deciding between FP4+ and T Max 400. Both are excellent films. If Ilford does decide to offer 4x10 FP4+ in the next production run, I may buy some (and some 7x17) then, but for now I'm going with T Max 400. I decided to go with the film that is available in all the formats I shoot. I'll be placing my order for 4x10 and 7x17 T Max 400 today.


Sal Santamaura
25-Jan-2006, 11:54
If one is fortunate enough to be interested in a format that's offered by Ilford and J&C/Kodak, I suggest not deciding between them; support both instead. I'm ordering the number of 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 FP4 Plus boxes originally intended and adding a quantity of wholeplate TMY as well. There will be a new cold storage device in my garage soon!

Kerry L. Thalmann
25-Jan-2006, 14:51
Sal - If one is fortunate enough to be interested in a format that's offered by Ilford and J&C/Kodak, I suggest not deciding between them; support both instead.

I certianly hope both ventures are wildly successful and both companies continue to offer such special production runs on a regular basis in the future.

However, for me, my preference is to go with a single film in all the formats I shoot. It's been about 15 years since I did any shooting in black and white. That will change once my 7x17 is up and running. I'm a simple kind of guy. As I dive into black and white with both feet, I want to stick with one film (initially, at least) and really get to know it before trying additional films. The fewer the variables, the better for me. In color, I shot exclusively Velvia for over a decade before I added a second film to my pack. I don't want to spend all my time experimenting with various film, developer and paper types. I want to pick something, learn it well and make some photographs. Once I am comfortable with those materials, know what they can and can't do, then I may try some additional combinations.

By the time Ilford is ready to do another production run, I may be ready to add a second film to my arsenal- assuming they offer it in the sizes I need.

I'm also looking at getting a dedicated film freezer for the garage. For years, I've had a dedicated film refrigerator which I've always kept stocked with a six month supply of my favorite film(s). A little less than a year ago, I stocked up on a couple years supply of 8x10 Velvia (cut down to 4x10) that is now taking up significant shelf space in our kitchen fridge. With these special ULF film offers, I also plan to stock up on black and white film in all the sizes I shoot as well. Bigger film + more of it = bigger freezer.


Bob Herbst
27-Jan-2006, 21:25
Gentlemen, All I can say is Wow! what a thread! I happened upon this thread AFTER I placed my order for 12x20 TMAX400 today. I'm going to risk commenting on what seems to be a common theme of a lot of worrying about missing out on a specific kind of film. I think most of you know me from one venue or another. I won't recite my resume. For 15 years, I shot exclusively with TMAX 400 in 4x5 and 8x10 until moving up to 12x20 format. TMAX 400 wasn't available in that format so I had to adapt to different films. I've shot a lot of Bergger BFP200 and HP5. A number of my students lately have been using JandC 400 and Efke 100. I was impressed by the quality of the film and resulting prints. All of these films are capable of making beautiful prints. You have to learn the characteristics of each and that is not always easy and it takes time, but in this age of rapidly disappearing traditional materials, I take the attitude of "adapt or die". I've lost some good images because of not being fully familiar with one of these films. But I've rescued just as many through printing adjustments and controls. A friend and student of mine brought over to my studio this evening some Pd prints he had just shot on JandC 400. They were absolutely beautiful and gave me second thought about paying double for the TMAX. But I'm buying TMAX 400 for a specific major project and I relish the idea of being able to use TMAX400 with which I am so familiar. But I'll tell you I'm also going to order some JandC 400 to try and if there is a next TMAX order, I may not be part of it depending on the results. Life is too short to worry so much about missing out on one kind of film or another. I adapt. In parallel with shooting with the 12x20, I have been teaching Pt/Pd printing from digital negatives for several years now. I had to adapt to digital methods to be able to teach Pt/Pd printing in local universities and colleges where students didn't have large format negatives or even access to the equipment to make them. I don't use digital negatives much in my own work but I expect that to change in the years to come especially since availability of film and the issues discussed in this thread will only get worse and the materials more expensive. To that end, I just bought a MicroTek 1800f film scanner (gasp! - heresy!) that I plan to use with the thousands of 4x5 negatives that were always just too small as platinum prints. I am doing this to adapt to the time when ULF film is no longer available or too expensive or I can no longer carry all of the equipment associated with a 12x20. Regardless of whether you want to support Kodak or Ilford, support one of them. TMAX400, HP5, and Bergger are good films. So is JandC Classic from the prints I've seen. Order what feels right to you but order something. Life is too short to worry so much. Good luck to all of you.

Kerry L. Thalmann
30-Jan-2006, 17:16
OK, I placed my order for 7x17 and 4x10 TMAX400. This is a blind leap of faith for me. I'm getting back into black in white for the first time in 15 years. I'll have a lot of learning to do, but figured I better take advantage of this opportunity while it's here. I may also still buy some FP4+ in 7x17 as it also seems well suited to my intended application (pd/pt prints).

I hope everyone else has placed their order (today is the last day for the pre-order discount).

Now, off to Home Depot to buy that new freezer for the garage.