Just my .02. I have worked with and known Judy for over 35 years. She has not made a penny from Post Factory - it was a labor of love. If you are thinking about scanning her work, think again - you are stealing. For years I have urged Judy to make PDF copies available for purchase - she has adamantly refused and argued that she only wants printed copies to be available. Proceed with great caution if you are thinking about scanning and distributing. Not only are you dishonoring the person that made the content available, but you are short circuiting folks like Judy Seigel who devoted part of her life to make the information available. Proceed with "great caution" if you are considering scanning.
Thanks for the words of warning, which I think are only appropriate.
I guess Ms. Seigel might be opposed to making PDF's for the reason that they could easily be pirated, though such a concern is kind of silly in this age of scanning, QTR and rapid propagation. A paper copy offers little more protection than a PDF.
Perhaps she is like the majority of analog enthusiasts and wishes to preserve an experience of
tactility to the journal? IDK...
But at any rate, paper copies are not even available! There are a number of people who are actively seeking the collection of PFP and yet cannot find it, myself included. Attempts have been made to contact her to no avail. I think we'd gladly pay a reasonable price for it and the resultant effects of this information being accessible to a new rank of analoggists might be surprsing.
What I'm saying is that we would love to pay homage & support Judy's efforts, but at the present time it appears we are unable to do so. So in a sense, she has short circuited herself. I think we can all appreciate that she has devoted a huge piece of herself to make this publication possible and I for one would love to be fully inspired by her efforts. Again, I'm not able to do so.
Is it possible for you to talk to her about this?
If she is unwilling to make copies available, she is creating a "market" for piracy, which may ultimately make a later campaign to reinvigorate the journal totally fruitless.