Stories of the Germans from Russia
Linda Sommer (LS)
Speaker, Germans from Russia Heritage Society Convention
Pierre, South Dakota
July 8, 1994
Transcription by Hope Wald
Edited by Linda Haag
LS: I should probably begin by saying for those
of you who didn’t get up to the Cultural Heritage Center
earlier in the week, and may not have met me before, my name is
Linda Sommer. I am the state archivist for South Dakota. The reason
I was asked to come and speak today was because your organization
group in North Dakota thought that there might be some of you who
might need some advice on how to take care of your family photographs
that you’re trying to preserve. That’s my topic for
today. I want to be, especially since we’re such a small
group, as loose as possible. If I’m speaking about something
that you have a question about please go ahead and interrupt me,
I won’t be at all offended or thrown off track by it. I’ve
done this enough that I can find my way back and find my place
and it will be ok. Since we all are kind of pressed for time I
want to make sure that I give you some information about where
to get more information than I have time to tell you about today.
My three favorite sources on this topic are these books, and I’ll
pass them around so you can get titles and addresses out of them
if you want to for ordering. This is the Society of American Archivists
basic manual series, there booklet on conservation. They’ve
done a series of about twenty books on different topics. This addresses
not only photographs, but how to take of family papers collections,
any paper based objects, books, photographs, and they also discuss
film to a certain degree. You’ll see a series of diagrams
and instructions in the back for making different types of these
closures, and for handling different types of paper storage problems.
This is my favorite source on old photographs. Not only because
it’s a very good source, but also because this man was my
teacher when I took classes at NDSU. So I’m a little attached
to him. He is the countries expert on photographs, no doubt about
it. He only covers materials up to about 1920, so if all of your
photographs are a more recent than that this book may not help
you. One thing that I love about this book is that those of us
who are a little lazy, and may not want to read the whole book,
you can grasp everything that Jim has to say. When you buy this
book you get this wonderful chart with it, and on it he has really
good telling photographs of the different photographic types that
were produced up to about 1920. What they are called, the time
period in which you will find them, and if you’re lucky enough
to have a really good quality magnifying glass or a small microscope
to get your hands on, those that are hard to tell the difference
between is given an idea on this side of the chart of what to look
for under a magnifying glass or microscope to distinguish the different
types. It’s a real handy tool.
If most of us should only work about having century photographs,
this is the better source for you. It’s particularly good
on color photography. If you have a photo lab in your town that
you’re satisfied with the quality of the pictures that you’re
getting back from them, you may want to point this book out to
them in case they have time to look at it. In the back are all
of the Kodak technical recommendations for producing colored photography
that lasts as long as possible. It does have a 19th century picture
in it also.
Can I take a minute to explain our two handouts? I see we have
some folks coming in the back. The one that has the darker cover
is from that purple conservation manual that I’m passing
around. The purpose for me giving you this is if you happen to
live in a small town where you can’t get a hold of the supplies
I’m talking about, but would like to buy some; this is a
list of suppliers who sell these things through the mail. Their
address is in there, and you can write to them and ask for a catalog.
One company that is listed there that I know will sell small quantities
of photo supplies through the mail is, the Light Impressions Company
in Rochester, NY. They have very good products. Most of the others
that are in that book do as well.
The other handout is the Society of American Archivist’s
sort of quick and easy information on what photographs are made
of, why they deteriorate, and what factors in our environment,
and in the way that we handle them or store them, have to destroy
or preserve them. I wanted to give you this because I didn’t
think there was time in the about of time that we had this afternoon
to get too technical about this, but there is some technical information
here that you can read on your own. I thought our time would best
be spent talking about we can do to take care of the pictures,
rather than what they’re made of and how they’re produced.
If I’m wrong about that let me know, and then during the
question period we’ll go through some of that. I want to
share with you one example of why you and I need to be concerned
about this in our homes. Both this yellow sheet and white sheet
are two copies of the exact same document so it doesn’t need
to go from side to side.
When I first came to South Dakota in 1988, I was horrified to
find it was the best of intentions, our staff had dry mounted virtually
our entire photo collection to cardboard mouth. Not knowing about
the cardboard they were fixing them to, or the adhesive they were
using, had an acid problem. Unfortunately over 90% of what they
used does have an acid problem. This has been done to over 80,000
prints in our collection, which means that we have 80,000 problems
to undue in order to preserve these photographs. We took the problem
to the conservation laboratory that we work most closely with,
which is the lab at the University of Denver in Colorado. It’s
called the Rocky Mountain Regional Conservation Center. They recommended
what they would give to remove these photographs, but told us that
if they were to do it in their laboratory, they’d have to
charge us 50 dollars per image. 50 dollars times 80,000 photographs
is certainly more money than the state of South Dakota is going
to invest in buying a conservative time for this problem. So our
staff had to learn that procedure, and we’ve been working
on solving that problem for about seven years now, and we’re
only about half done. You’re never going to have a problem
that big in your house, but before you get a problem that big,
you take it to a conservator and spend money on. It’s just
like everything else in your life, prevention, “an ounce
of prevention, a pound cured”.
One of the things that seriously harm photographs is the way that
we handle them. As a real graphic example of this I want to pass
around this X-ray that really hasn’t been handled very often.
It’s been handled in three workshops that I’ve used
it for since I found it by six jurors, two defense attorneys, one
prosecuting attorney, and I assume some folks in the county sheriff’s
office who gave it to me. So it hasn’t had a tremendous amount
of handling, but it’s had enough.
This is an X-ray used in a court case out there; I forgot to say
that. You can see serious fingerprint damage on that, move it up
to the light. All those things that I’m going to pass
around I bought, or borrowed, or someone gave me exclusively who
weren’t using the workshops, so don’t be afraid to
touch them. You’re not harming anything that’s precious
to the South Dakota Historical Society.
What we learned from that is that if you’re having photographs,
if it’s real precious to you and you want to preserve it,
photographs or negatives, do something like wear some little cheap
white cotton gloves to handle them. If you don’t want to
invest into something like this, when you do handle it, handle
it by the edges. Don’t put your fingers in the center of
it. When you’re labeling it we hope that everyone will try
to identify these pictures, they won’t mean anything to your
family members after your gone if you don’t. When you are
labeling them, don’t write on the center of the back. That
will eventually transfer through to the front of your picture as
the ink, the acid and the ink, decompose. Ballpoint pen is the
worst. Felt tip pen is probably the next worst because of the acids
in the ink. At the state historical society the only thing we’ll
do to mark a photograph is to use a #2 soft lead pencil to mark
a number in the corner on the reverse. That’s the only thing
we write on the picture. Then we put all of our cataloging, identifying
information on paper in our computers tacked to that number. You
may want to try something similar with your own pictures. I’ll
talk about some other methods as we come across different storage
Audience: There was a blue soft pencil; do you
know what I’m talking about?
LS: I’d be suspicious of the blue dye in
that pencil. But since I don’t have the pencil to
test I don’t want to depreciate someone else’s product,
but I’d be suspicious of anything that was blue. There has
to be some dye in it to make it blue.
Audience: On most photographs pencils don’t
LS: On modern photography that is a problem because
you have that glossy surface and it smudges off. I’ll skip
ahead a little bit and talk about plastic exposure because that’s
a partial answer to your question. The first three things I’m
going to say aren’t kind of directly to answer your question;
so be patient and I’ll get to it quickly. One type of good
storage mechanism is plastic sleeves that are made out of preservation
quality plastics. There are only three of those; they are polyester,
which some of you may know as mylark type D, that’s the most
commonly manufactured polyester, there’s also a commonly
sold one that I think is, if I remember the pronunciation of the
company right, is Monex, the generic term is polyester, the other
two are polyethylene, which this sleeve that I’ll pass around
is made from; and polypropylene, which is also a stable plastic,
which is more rigid than this sleeve. You can tell the difference
between polyethylene and polypropylene by weather it’s soft
and bendable, or weather it’s a hard sleeve. All three of
the one’s that I mentioned are chemically stable; they’re
not going to harm the photographs that you put into them because
of what they’re chemically made of. Usually the one’s
that are of good quality because they’re charging you more
for them they will bother to put one of those words on it. Just
because it says preservation the federal government doesn’t
monitor it, so you don’t need to word preservation on anything;
we’ve learned that through sad experiences. I’m sure
that this sleeve was sold to someone, for example, with the word
preservation on it. Somewhere this was a good preservation tool.
This is the bad plastic, polyvinylchloride, and it’s unfortunately
the one that is most widely sold because it’s the least expensive
The sleeve that I passed around and this sleeve were purchased
within a month of each other. When you have this one in your hand
you can see how nice and soft and flat and fluffy it still is.
When you have this one in your hand you can see how this plastic
in just eight years has not even really been used, it’s just
been in storage with this sleeve. What serious damage has happened
to this, all of the cockling and waving in it, and what’s
happening here that’s harmful to your photographs is that
the chlorine that’s in this is leaching out and gassing off
from this product. Where’s it gassing off to? It’s
gassing off to your slides, your photos, you’re whatever
else you have stored in here. Most of the inexpensive albums that
you buy at K-mart, at Wal-Mart, or Ben Franklin, or what have you,
the plastic in it is this kind of plastic, and it’s eventually
going to do that kind of damage to your photographs. I sure don’t
mean to suggest to anyone that every photograph that you have is
worth spending the money on to do this special kind of care we’re
talking about today. If you’ve got 45 pictures of little
Johnny’s 4th Birthday party, all 45 of them aren’t
equally precious to you, pick the two or three that are and try
to preserve those. Don’t worry about the others. Put those
in an inexpensive album and let the folks scan through them. Don’t
keep grandma’s wedding picture in an album like this, anything
that you want to pass along to your children and grandchildren
needs to be better protected than in a sleeve like that.
What’s good about the three plastic sleeves, and an answer
to your question, is that you can put a photograph in that sleeve
and put a paper label, just a stick on label, and this plastic
will certainly protects your photograph from the adhesive on the
stick on label and the bad paper it’s made out of for 65
or 70 years. By then someone surely could invest the money to put
them into a new sleeve. You can put your labeling on the back of
that piece of paper that you stuck to the master plastic on the
photo in your album.
Audience: Is that proven that 65 to 70 years,
is that proven?
LS: Only the chemical aging test, because a lot
of these products haven’t been on the market for more than
15 to 20 years at most. The Library of Congress and institutions
like that have done some chemical aging tests on some of these
products. The Hollanger Corporation in Virginia has also funded
and that’s just kind of a guesstimate that you’re going
to have at least that much protection even if you would have something
back that’s on the outside of it. I’m sure that’s
real conservative also.
We all know that we’re all told not to laminate the document
because it provides permanent harm to that document in capsulate
vs. laminate, most of you probably heard that. I had seen in my
faliptions and elsewhere, things that have been laminated for more
than 50 years that are still quite usable and haven’t degraded
to the point that we expect them to; perhaps were lucky. I’m
not standing for recommending anyone laminate anything, but I’m
saying that if you have you may not need to think you’ve
done the worst thing in the world, and your children aren’t
going to be able to see this document. If you haven’t done
it yet, don’t do it. To make a sleeve for something, basically
a sandwich to put around a documented photograph out of one of
those three pieces of plastic, lamination melts the plastic into
the object inside it, and a capsulation just creates basically
a bolder binder in which to store it. It gives the same physical
support and the same support against environmental conditions and
handling that might harm it, but it doesn’t melt the plastic
permanently into the document. Lamination does do that, and that’s
what conservers are worried about because you can permanently chemically
change what’s inside the sandwich that you made for the lamination.
Those plastics are wonderful.
With the three that I mentioned, unless you’re in a humid
environment or any environment where the temperature and humidity
goes up and down constantly, the reason that they can be harmful
in that kind of environment is because moisture will get trapped
inside them and create little water spots. The water doesn’t
have anywhere to go inside plastic except onto your photograph
or onto the paper, or whatever you have inside that plastic sleeve.
If you know you have that kind of a problem there are all kinds
of acid neutral paper sleeves that you can buy. I’ll just
pass around a couple of examples.
On this one I particularly like you to notice that this seam on
this side, so all of the adhesives on this are on the side. It’s
a bad idea to buy an envelope where the seams down the center because
eventually the glue that’s in that adhesive line down the
center is going to transfer to what’s inside it. Even better
is to have an envelope with no seams, particularly for negatives.
You can buy these even in a lot of photo studio stores that take
professional photography studios that will replace when you take
your film to be developed. No adhesives, no seams in here. The
other good thing about this type of envelope, which is called,
in all the literature, a four-flap envelope, is that you never
have any problems sliding the picture in and out, getting it caught
on a seam, scratching it with anything that might have fallen inside
the envelope, you can open this up and lift it out. These are also
expensive. Choose carefully the photographs that you want
to preserve and spend your money on those.
One of the big problems with photographs is that they are made
with a variety of materials which degrade at different rates, and
interact with each other in different ways depending on what their
stored in. That’s why we like to put things in their own
little pristine environment in a clean acid-neutral envelope, or
This photograph on your left is a type called a “protino” type.
I want you to notice the transfer of this lady’s face over
to this page. Most modern photographs the image bearing substance
that’s in the gelatin that produced the photograph is silver
salt. That’s what reflects the light back to you and let’s
you see a photograph, the image that was created. In a platinum
print that salt is platinum salt. It’s particularly subject
to this kind of transfer image onto whatever it’s attached
to. The original picture is being harmed because it’s in
contact with acidic paper and it probably was originally darker
than you see here. Just one strong example of the chemical changes
that take place in an album, or in something that your storing
that your storing with, and a good reason for, as I said storing
things separately or putting some kind of a barrier between images.
Something that’s particularly harmful to photographs also
harmful to any organic or light sensitive substance is exposure
to certain kinds of light. This photograph is fading, not terribly
bad but I’m sure you can see it’s faded enough that
it’s not the original picture, what we originally had in
that picture. The most harm is done by ultraviolet radiation. The
most common sources of that is natural sunlight, or fluorescent
tubes. There are very inexpensive things that you can buy, and
you’ll have them in your list in your handout, to wrap around
a fluorescent tube. Those cost, I think the most expensive one
I’ve seen was about 50 cents. It’s an ultraviolet shielding
piece of film you can wrap around a tube, put it on a window; if
you have something hanging on a wall that you need to protect from
sunlight you can buy ultraviolet radiation filtering Plexiglas,
its called UF3. It doesn’t really change the appearance of
what you put on the wall, but it protects it from fading damage
from light. Any photo framing store or glass company will usually
sell that and they’ll cut it to size for you. I believe that
there is a supplier for UF3; it’s a type of Plexiglas. As
I said, if you have any reputable frame shop that may be in your
community will have it, or the people that fix car windows, or
windows in your house, usually if they don’t carry it can
get it for you. It’s really not much more expensive than
a sheet of glass surprisingly. It’s worth spending it for
something that’s precious to you.
It’s also important when you frame something to have
a mat between it and the glass. If you don’t put a mat between
the glass of something your framing and the object itself, again
humidity is a problem if you have a humid or fluctuating humidity
condition particularly with photographs and pastel print type documents,
pages from old magazines with that glossy surface, a lot of times
people will like to frame those, old lithographic print that might
have heavy inks on them, that moisture will make them stick to
the glass and it’s almost impossible to get them off of the
glass without ruining the object or at least damaging it significantly.
If you’re getting something framed that’s precious
to you, please have a mat between the object and the frame. An
acid-neutral mat is a good thing to do.
I brought this photograph along with me to show you a condition
that’s called foxing that’s really common in photographs
as they age. Nothing that happened to photographs usually happens
from one particular source, it’s a combination of things.
Foxing can occur because of the adhesive that’s behind the
print that attached it to the card, for those of you who haven’t
seen it yet, we’re talking about little brown spots, and
you’ll see those. It can happen from interaction of the chemicals
in a print that wasn’t properly washed with the environment
around it for being in contact with an acidic board such as the
board in the adhesive behind it is probably what caused the problems
in this print because it doesn’t appear to have a lot of
these digital chemicals left on it when we touched it.
The reason I wanted to bring that with me is because a lot of
you have probably seen it in your own photographs. You’re
going to start seeing a new type of Foxing in new photographs if
you use magnetic albums to store your photos in. If you look at
those carefully even when their new, when their new you see the
kind of gray stripes going this way or this way on the page, as
they start to age those turn yellow. What those stripes are, rather
than being a magnet, is they are a type of adhesive that the picture
sticks to. As your photographs and those pages age, inside them,
particularly covered with plastic, it’s going to happen faster.
You’re going to get little yellow stripes across or down
your photographs depending on what’s inside them. Usually
in those magnetic albums, the plastic page that comes over and
closes them is that bad polyvinylchloride plastic. So you’ve
got at least two problems with those.
Another thing that’s real common is those old black page
scrapbook type albums, that paper is real acidic paper. I say that
knowing that many of you have albums that may be 85-90 years old
in your home that you have pictures in those that look just fine
to you. If you were able to prepare them to what that picture looked
like 75 years ago though, you would see some degradation and you
will continue to see degradation of that print from being in contact
with that paper, particularly on an image bearing side.
I talked about polyester, but I didn’t pass any around.
This poor scruffy looking little thing is something that I used
in workshops when we’re discussing different subjects, which
is how to take care of paper generally. We do day long workshops
at the state historical society to teach you how to clean paper,
how to remove adhesive tapes from it, how to flatten it for storage,
how to flatten your photographs for storage if you’ve gotten
them curled up somehow. We take surface dirt off of things, and
we repair tears in most of our workshops. One of the things that
we do is everyone, with whatever pieces of paper their working
on in the workshop that day, we have them encapsulated in polyester
fashions similar to this.
This is polyester; it’s a very narrow grade of polyester.
This is only one mill; most of it is three mills thick. After we
have the people in the workshops work real hard and encapsulating
something we say, “Ok, now pick it up and do this”.
You scrunch it up, and then we have you cut it open. When you do
cut it open you see that all of the damage that you have done to
the plastic hasn’t happened to the paper inside of it. A
little bit of it has, but 90% of it hasn’t. All the little
crinkly lines that you see in this plastic if I took this piece
of paper out it wouldn’t be there. So that’s kind of
a dramatic representation to people that attend one of our workshops
of just how much protection that plastic can provide in terms of
I’ve talked a lot about acid, and the damage from acid.
One question that people usually ask me is, “Suppose I go
out and spend all this money, how do I know that I got what I paid
for?” Well in South Dakota, and maybe in the state that you
live if you’re not from South Dakota, we’re happy to
have you send samples of stuff to our lab of what you purchased
and we’ll test it for PH for you. It’s also something
you can do in your home; we’d be glad to send your strips
to help you do it in your home, very simple process. If you took
high school or college chemistry you’ve used these little
PH and acid based indicator strips before the basic chemistry behind
it, is that you moisten this strip in contact with the object that
you’re testing. After the strip has been in contact with
that object for, oh it never takes longer than about three minutes;
you compare it to the chart that comes with these boxes. What color
it turned to tells you what the acid rating on it is. I’ll
pass that around so you can see those. I brought the one from our
lab that is the greatest range because it’s the one we used
the least often.
The PH scale runs from 0-14, and that one attempts to measure
that entire broad scale. The narrower group measurement of strips
you get the better measurement you’re going to get. I wouldn’t
recommend that folks go out and buy those PH indicator pans that
are in a lot of the catalogs, and in a lot of photo supply stores
because they leave permanent purple mark on whatever you’re
testing. These don’t leave any mark at all. Basically what
you do is you put a little drop of distilled water on the corner
of what you’re trying to test, turn that strip face down
straight on top of it, and put some hydroglader or cottonrad or
cheesetop on top of that to weigh it down. Wait a few minutes,
pick it off, and compare it to the chart. If you have a reading
in our lab, anything that measures below a 5.5, retrieve it. Anything
that measures above that we know it has a certain amount of life
in it before it starts turning acidic to contaminate the rest of
our collection. If you’re curious about that process that’s
real simple to learn, and I think it’s explained in that
purple book that we passed around for any of you that are interested
in that. I’ll stop now, but if any of you have questions
I’d be happy to stay and try and answer those for you.
Audience: Some of our, now our kids are 19 and
15, but some of their baby photographs have already yellowed. It’s
evidently from the cheaper photograph company. Is that something
that’s going too completely, is it just going to get to a
certain point where it stays at that yellow stage and gets worse?
LS: If they’re colorful, what you’re
going to eventually have left is just kind of some outlines that’ll
be kind of degraded.
Audience: It’s just the paper that was used, or the
LS: If you took it to an inexpensive place to
have it done it’s probably a combination of the paper in
reaction to the dyes that were used to make the color in the image.
Those dyes are pretty much unstable in most color photography.
The dyes that they used in slides are more chemically stable and
will last longer than coloring of the print. They tell me that
a slide from a store copier should last quite a few years without
significant degradation, but store copier means pretty cold storage,
and pretty low relative humidity. Like low storage I’m talking
about the 50 degrees, and a relative humidity of about 35%. So
if you can’t achieve that you’re going
to have a less amount of time.
There’s one type of slide that I think its called fiberchrome,
and they think that should last 250-500 years. There are chemists
working at Kodak and places like Kodak on producing more stable
color photography film for sale to the public. That will come eventually,
we don’t have it yet. The more IS phone number the more stable
is generally true. There are other factors that can affect that
though, so I wouldn’t want to say always something that would
buy at 31,000 is going to last as long as something (?). But generically
that’s true. Do you want to talk to her about the point you
Audience: Sorry I didn’t get to explain.
The speed, the slower the film, probably I would say the more stable.
If the film has to be very fast, then it doesn’t need much
light, and that might mean that the chemicals might be faster reactant.
LS: It can be more subject to light damage later
because it was exposed to less light in its creation and that’s
part of the theory behind the point that this gentlemen made. Copying
things for duplication in a book introduces a totally different
technology than just photography. A lot of times you’re dealing
with the quality of the printing mechanism, and you’re also
dealing with the level of contrast in both the black and white,
and color photographs, and the number of colors and shadings that
are introduced into the color photograph in terms of reproducing
it in another median. We have a problem sometimes when we microfilm
something. Sometimes were microfilming a newspaper for example,
and you know from looking at a newspaper there are some very dark
parts and very light parts, and the machine that is reading the
amount of light that should be shed onto that picture, that may
be part of the printing process I’m not an expert in printing
so I probably shouldn’t assume that, but it could be a similar
problem that the machine that reads that reads kind of a happy
medium. It doesn’t do as good a job on the lighter portions
in a way from that medium or the dark proportions as least with
filming. That’s a possible explanation to this.
Audience: I just had a family snapshot enlarged,
and I expected that studio to be a good one, and I was very surprised.
It took them a while to play around with the coloring and stuff.
I am going to talk to them about it and find out what in the world
happened because it is not even as good as the snapshot.
LS: Did you notice that chart that I passed around
and how some of the images when you look at them under a microscope
are little dots. Something that’s produced when is made out
of those little dots, just like on a television screen, they have
trouble making television screens bigger because the image on the
television screen is made out of little dots called pixels, and
when you expand those you loose a lot of the definition, and you
don’t get a sharper picture. Most negatives that we have
today commonly are 35mm negatives, and you have trouble blowing
those up much to an 8x10 without losing some of the definition
in a picture.
Audience: It was a 5x7 print.
LS: You probably got stages of copies. They probably
made a 35mm negative cover your 5x7 print to duplicate it and blew
it up from that little tiny negative to fit whatever size picture
you need. The only other thing they could have done is to make
it into a negative and then a positive for you, and that would
cost you a lot of money.
Audience: Can I see the graph chart?
LS: I think you might be better off in Canada
than in the United States because the (?) archives of Canada are
who taught the archivist of the United States how to tip their
photographs. They did a lot of the original research, and they
were on the bandwagon first to get Kodak to do something about
Audience: ... (?) available?
LS: It sure should be, especially scientific
in some of the other things. If you have any trouble, write to
your public archive of Canada, or whatever local branch off that
might be near you. I’m sure they have one, every archivist
I ever meet from Canada, and I’m just impressed to the bones.
They are so welcoming and have such a good support group for each
other. If you need the name of the expert in their country, Bob
(?), and he works for the public archive of Canada.
Audience: Where would he be?
LS: At this point I know they have branch offices
like my national archives do, if you’d write down your name
and address for me and I’ll main you his address. I can’t
remember which part of Canada he works in. He comes to the United
States free world (?).
Audience: I was wondering if you used 35mm
cameras as slides and so forth, should you use color prints or
should you use black and white prints to take pictures of pictures?
Sometimes the color will look more age like.
LS: Black and white photography is chemically
much more stable than any photo, and something that’s precious
to you it’s always a good idea to make a black and white
copy. What we do with our photography when we have some impressionists,
the last thing we did it with, bless his heart, were all pictures
from the Governors funeral. Those were all taken apart. We made
black and white copies and just tried to label them the black and
white copies in our computers as carefully as we could what the
colors were in the original pictures because we know their going
to stay. At least we can preserve the information in black and
Anybody else? Thank you all so much for coming. Enjoy the rest
of your meeting, I sure have been.