Hi Ken.

I think Donald Miller has done that kind of comparison, and your supsicion might be correct, but there's more to the appeal of Azo than its Dmax, and much of its appeal probably doesn't correlate to digital printing in any way. For instance, Azo is very slow, so printing can be done in a much brighter environment, with far less risk of fogging, which is nice. Azo also keeps very well; I've printed on 50 year old Azo that looked better than my fresh box. Azo is very fine grained, very responsive to developer formulae, and tones extremely well. These are all very practical benefits for DR printeres that have little relevance for digital printers, and do not address the issues of Exposure Scale, paper finish, or Dmax, which are of interest to both camps, and which I leave to the more zealous members of those camps to argue, besides, my knowledge of digital printing is practically non-existent.

Jay

P.S. Those who demand accuracy can replace Azo is with Azo was where they appear above.