Title: NOT BAD FOR AN OLD GUY
Product review: Excellent book BUTThe pages are reproduced from the University of California at Berkeley library copy of the text (1923), they even copied the handwritten notes in the marginsThe paper is high quality, the camera work on the page copies is not the greatest but pretty good and readable the reproduction on some of the original drawings fade out a little but over all the lithography printing is good. It is considered a reproduction of an artifact. One of the last pages has the due date for return, one is in 1952 and the next one is in 1991
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
