UKC

just looking at the recent top ascents and it looks like there was a new E10 put up today!? Divine Moments Of Truth (E9 6c)

In reply to JSH:

Looks like Franco's been at it again...

In reply to MischaHY:

Franco's the man!

In reply to JSH:

I just know the question that's going to swarm this thread, is it really E10?

In reply to coreybennett:

Looked E11 to me...

In reply to JSH:

Are you sitting comfortably.....

In reply to JSH:

Proper good Psy name

In reply to LakesWinter:

Good name but spelled wrong. Are you Shpongled?

In reply to aln:

YeAh!

In reply to JSH:

oops just realized I spelled it wrong :p

In reply to Yanis Nayu:
With side runners...

In reply to JSH: But what's he done on Grit?

Andy F

In reply to JSH:


Has this been retro-tradded?! Thin end of the wedge!

In reply to JSH:

Sounds good. Pity he seems to have stopped blogging; would have liked to have read something more about it.

In reply to JSH:

Cue the Franco basher's
Well done though

In reply to goose299:


Why would anyone disbelieve his grades?😆

Andy F

In reply to Michael Gordon:

http://francocookson.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/divine-moments-of-trurh-h10-7a....

Another top quality route added to the Moors...

In reply to Lh88:

Thanks for that. Not sure how I missed it before

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Ta for all the comments. I made my blog un-googleable when I became a secondary school teacher and got rid of the "-climbing" part of it so none of the links worked. It ended up just being a personal diary for what I was thinking about the route, without having to worry about what others would think!

The grade thing still upsets me Andy. It leaves a bitter taste in an area where there is no bitterness. I like that the Moors is low-key.

Hypocrisy of Moose (H8 6c), Fly Agaric (H8 7a), Gold (H8 7a) and Infinity In A Grain of Sand (H8 6c) are all much of a muchness. Psykovsky's Sequins is a touch harder than these, floating around H8+. Sky Burial (H9 6c) is considerably harder than all of these and Divine Moments of Truth is harder again.

Call it what you want, the grades in the Moors work. Can you now stop commenting on the grades of routes you haven't done?


Lot's still remain!

In reply to Franco Cookson:

I'm impressed Franco. Not only with the climbing (way out of my league) but also with the insights on your blog. Some day you'll write a "minor classic" book on your climbing adventures. Look after yourself though!

"My next project is going to be full chocks-away mind-splitting soloing. Task number 1: make sure there is no gear. It needs to be a proper death route, for soon I will be old and will not dare to set out."

In reply to Franco Cookson:
top effort awesome looking route and great name!

In reply to Franco Cookson:

Well done Franco.

In reply to JSH: Franco - how do you differentiate between a highball and a route with an H/E grade?

In reply to Franco Cookson:


Totally agree.

[To AF] You need to let it go, mate - or else do repeats.

Mick

In reply to wbo:


[Pending Franco's definitive reply]

A guess...

Highball failure: Ego hurt.

Failure on many of Franco's high H/E grades: Everything hurt.

Mick

In reply to wbo:

I don't really understand your question.

If you'd like an introduction to the route, this takes you some of the way there..
youtube.com/watch?v=8qt2WbfotkU&

In reply to Franco Cookson:


That's a shame, I used to enjoy it when you spent your afternoon abusing people on here.

In reply to Franco Cookson:



It wouldn't upset me and shouldn't upset you.
Farnell's claim to fame is a cutting edge redpoint of a Malham 8a+ (say no more) - not sure how long it took him, probablay about the same amount of time it took you to climb about a couple of dozen Moors E6's and above.
Keep up the good work Franco, you're a star!

Boggy

In reply to JSH: Sorry if it was unclear... in your pictures some of your highballs are rather high and you have routes of a similar lengh, so I'm simply curious where you stop using a bouldering grade and go to a route grade.

In reply to JSH:

The same crag, is home to the route with the best description of how dangerous it is: -

The Arete (Project) (E8 7b)

"Relatively safe with rolling - just a steep rocky hillside"...

In reply to Franco Cookson:

Great effort - the photos and route look fantastic.



Secondary school teacher...sorry, but reading that is like nails down a blackboard to me!

In reply to Franco Cookson:



Well, you know what to do


No. I still haven't got the empirical proof. One downgraded route, nothing hard done outside your area, nothing still as a national benchmark. When you provide it, I will believe it.

Andy F

In reply to Bogwalloper:




Actually it was at Kilnsey. And it took bloody ages. What have you done?

Andy F

In reply to wbo:

risk of missing the point here Franco uses
H- headpoint (ie pre-practiced then led)
E- on sight grade

does that help (or maybe not if i have misunderstood you)

In reply to Mick Ward:




Couldn't agree more, Mick. Witch hunt... sad... almost obsessive. Franco's proved himself enough, I think.

In reply to jon:

Has anyone checked this new E10 has a death fall?

In reply to Removed User:


Who cares? How much fun was he having?

In reply to jon:


I wonder if I am the only Franco fanboy who thinks Andy Farnell does kind of have a point, regardless of whether it's personal or not. Franco can take it.

In reply to wbo:

Generally we try to use a trad grade. I'm a big believer that trad grades work fine on bigger boulder problems and there's a long history of this in the moors. Most routes will get both grades anyway unless they are risking death.

There's a certain irony to the amount of attention grading in the moors has now got. When I started climbing it was not at all uncommon for routes to be 3 or 4 grades out. The moors has never been so standardised. Piddly little arguments about whether an h10 might in fact be h9 or h11 seem frankly ludicrous against that backdrop.

In reply to Franco Cookson:

Well done Franco on another good lead.....

In reply to Franco Cookson:

Did the "UKC mini tricam" get used Franco?

Good effort. Now away with you and plan your lessons (what I am clearly not doing right now! ).

In reply to TobyA:
Yes, crucial bit of gear and a reasonably good runner considering its size. Class bit of kit that I hope to use again! I found it fitted in the Blunt Arete Project (E10 7b) too...

Thanks a lot for that again!

In reply to Franco Cookson:

Can you clarify what is meant by the phrase 'the Line of bolts...has gradually come out' in the route description? Did you remove them one by one as you freed the respective sequence? (Was the whole route originally bolted or just sections of it?)

In reply to andy farnell:


[...]

Does this mean you need a lift to crag?

In reply to Franco Cookson:


Please tell me you are a Maths teacher

Well done on the new route.

In reply to JSH:

Well played, Franco.

jcm

In reply to andy farnell:



Except, if it hadn't been for the use of a filed down slider on the route he proposed as being E10 which Birkett repeated, the grade looks like it would have remained as a solo, and in any case it was only down graded to E8.

In reply to Timmd:


Was that outside his area? Has he repeated anything of national significance put up by anyone else? Just asking.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:


why does it matter (to you) if the grade seems to have been pretty accurate anyway?

So what if he hasn't climbed outside of his area if the grade seems about right as a result of a repeat by a well respected trad climber?

I think Franco shouldn't give a damn what you think given the repeat of his route by Bill Birket to be honest.

In reply to Timmd:


*tentatively raises finger...*

In reply to Timmd:

I'd be very impressed if Dave's dad repeated an E8!

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

If Franco was claiming to be "Britain's Greatest Climber", your sniping might seem worthwhile. Since all that he's claiming is the grade of a particular route, it seems to be irrelevant at best and actually rather sad.

The Dave Birkett affair only seems to me to reinforce Franco's credentials to claim the grade and summing up those events as "Birkett downgraded his previous E10 to E8" is wildly unfair of you (I would suggest ignorance but your bizarre obsession with Franco would suggest that you haven't missed or forgotten the important detail about the gear).

In reply to Luke90: So Franco didn't spot the gear, Dave did. Franco soloed an E8. Impressive going by any measure.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:


Franco *did* spot the gear placement. He even started a thread on UKC asking how to protect it, but nobody knew of a sensible way of doing so.


Regarding "Divine Moments" the issue is Franco's ability to grade routes. Now, on the presumption that nothing would fit that mono, Franco's grade for Psychovsky's Sequins was pretty spot on, wasn't it? Go on, admit that. Because that says that his ability to grade routes (as oppose to his ability to come up with hyper-specialist gear) is pretty spot on.

In reply to andy farnell:



Oops!

In reply to Fraser:


Oops!

In reply to Coel Hellier:

Whatever you opinion on the grade of some of his previous grade claims, the major point is still this: What is he judging his grades against? His own routes or those nationally accepted? Where is his background of hard repeats of other similar routes? It's not as if he hasn't got the talent or the balls.

He hasn't got any evidence of a history of valid, well known yardsticks against which he can give a valid grade of national importance. When other climbers claiming similar grades put them up they (usually) have a history of impressive repeats. This is why they are usually believed, unless they make wild claims, such as the Walk of Life scenario. You must admit that claiming E9/10/11 without any known repeats of routes of a similar grade is going to attract attention and inspection. All I am doing is questioning where he's getting the figures from.

They may be right, I've never denied that. Ever. I just don't believe them at present. Evidence will change that. Which is what I have said all along.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

I don't get your point here. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
So he climbed a new trad route and graded it based on his experience. That is what you are supposed to do! What do you suggest he does with it? Not grade it? Undergrade it to sandbag the next one? If you don't believe the grade, repeat it, downgrade it and then rant about it.

In reply to andy farnell:

You seem more interested in having Franco repeat routes in other areas rather than trying to persuade other top climbers to head over, try the routes and confirm or dispute the grade. Would the latter not be the best way to get the grade issues put to bed?

In reply to andy farnell:

Yeah, but the point is that the routes he is doing are hugely bold. Psychologically these are hugely "personal" ascents, as is clear if you read his blog. Given that, it is entirely understandable if he only feels inspired on first ascents, but not repeats, or if he only feels inspired in the home territory that he clearly loves. It is simply unreasonable to expect that level of performance across the board.

Yes, the very, very best, people like McLeod and Birkett might be capable of that, but climbing hugely bold E8/9/10s is clearly a hugely personal activity.

So maybe Franco is indeed only judging from his own routes and by extrapolating from easier routes elsewhere. That in itself doesn't mean they are wrong, and the evidence from Birkett (who had no issue with knocking 3 grades off Walk of Life) is that Franco's grading is fair. Further, I suspect that were these only ~ E6 or so, enough people would have repeated some of them and reported a downgrade, even if it is not a mainstream area.

Yes of course we will only have real confirmation when more of them have had more ascents, but in the meantime Franco is doing his best to grade them as accurately and honestly as he can, which is all he can do. Yet you seem to be being mean to him just for the fun of it.

In reply to smollett: My point is not so much the grade, just what he is basing it on. He has no current evidence of ascents of other routes around that grade established by anyone else. He has no established and recognised benchmark. Other climbers operating at that level do.

As I've stated already, I wouldn't know him if I bumped into him in the street. I have no ax to grind, I am just interested in seeing routes which are given huge numbers have the back up of other reputable big numbers.

History and track record are important in establishing validity of big claims.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

You may have a point but, at the end of the day, they're just grades and not important as such.

Franco does, however, seem to be having plenty of fun.

In reply to andy farnell:

You have way to much time on your hands

In reply to Coel Hellier:




The hardest route he has evidence for outside his own area is a well trodden grit E6. Extrapolating E10 is a bit of a jumps, 2 E8's in his own area notwithstanding. Franco won't be the last person to have his grades challenged by others. They may well be very hard and bold, but how would he know how hard they are on a nationally agreed scale without national experience?


See my points previously. He can be honest, but accurate? He has no agreed yardstick. No point of agreed reference. It wouldn't matter who put the route up, but if someone is claiming the big numbers without the backing they need to be asked how they came up with the grade. They are after all national, not just N. Yorks grades.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

Your points aren't completely lacking in logic and I don't think anybody's saying that they are. You're right, the grades would appear more reliable if he'd climbed a wider range of similarly hard problems and you're obviously well within your rights to have personal doubts over the validity of the grade.

The part most people seem to be disagreeing with is your constant moaning about that issue on here. You seem to feel entitled to demand that Franco structure his own personal climbing around your need to validate his grades.

That might make a modicum of sense if:
a) Franco was a big-name sponsored climber
b) Franco was making a massive deal out of these climbs
c) Climbing was a big enough deal that serious money hung on any of this
d) The claimed grades were so outrageous that the climbs were actually trivial routes that don't deserve to be reported

Given that NONE of the above are the case, why does it even matter whether you, I or anyone else believe his grades are reliable?

In reply to Luke90: Because he has claimed that his routes are of national difficulty (by giving them the grades he has) without any verified track record. That is my issue. If it turns out he's right, brilliant. He was right. All I have done is ask how he has claimed those grades at the moment.

I'd say giving something E10 is outrageous if you don't have the track record to back it up. I'm here to be proved wrong, but the older members may well remember the fuss over the grades Mark Edwards claimed for his routes back in the 80's. Some were proven right, others wrong.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:


More reliable 'evidence' would come from this route being tried/repeated by others. Repeats are much more useful in determining the accuracy of grades of specific routes. A proven track record does not necessarily stop someone from grading inaccurately - consider James Pearson. The experience of a FA can be very different from that of a repeater.

In reply to andy farnell:


Absolutely, there's no variation in grades across the country at all - Pembroke, Lakes, Wales, Scotland, Peak - all totally consistent....

For what little it's worth, I sort of get your point but I don't see what you expect Franco to do about it right now. He's climbed the route, he needs to put some sort of a grade on it, he's given his best stab at it and , as discussed ad nauseum, he's been proven to be pretty close before. Whilst you might doubt the grade, Franco can only do his best at grading it.

I see what you mean about ideally getting more experience in other parts of the country but that doesn't take away either from Franco's achievement or his right to grade it as best he can. As others have said, repeats are just as or more valuable and there is evidence he was pretty close previously. Your continued criticism seems quite unfair and doesn't reflect well.

In reply to andy farnell:

Andy, you might want to consider the possibility that Franco climbs on well known hard routes in the area where he lives, but he's not interested in spraying about them because (perhaps, being a contrarian by nature) they're not "in the moors".

In reply to andy farnell:


I can remember a situation even further back - it involved the first free ascent of Linden at Curbar, and a certain Mick Fowler.

Quite a few respected peak climbers got a bit of egg on their faces when they questioned both the validity of the ascent and the climber in question?

In reply to Skyfall: Where have I criticised the route, climber or achievement? All I've pointed out is that he hasn't got the national experience at those big numbers to give the grade. If they turn out to be right, which is a perfectly plausible outcome, fantastic. If not then they don't and they will get adjusted, so other routes will be more accurate in future. No harm done, everyone wins.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

If all you'd done was put a single quiet comment on on of the threads about the route to the effect that you congratulated him on the climb but would harbour some doubts about the grade until it was confirmed, nobody would be criticising you. That's not what you've done.

You seem to continuously suggest that Franco has no right to even suggest the grade until his climbing logbook conforms to your idea of the required qualifications. Why should his personal climbing have anything to do with you?

You also keep using phrases like "no track record", which is clearly untrue. Birkett's previous repeats of Franco's routes are strongly suggestive that he has at least some idea what he's talking about and he deserves some recognition for that.

In reply to andy farnell:

The major difference between Franco and Mark Edwards is that the grading of Mark's routes were disputed mainly by people who were operating at the cutting edge of climbing at the time like Andy Pollit. Franco seems to somehow be hounded by someone who isn't performing at the cutting edge of climbing in 1985 let alone 2015. The other general difference is that many of the people who had an axe to grind with the Edwards did so due to either real or perceived ethical differences. I would say that in both cases a good dose of jealousy, stirring and stupidity is probably involved.

Mark Edwards followed his own path, possibly made some mistakes when viewed through today's eyes and left behind a lasting legacy of extremely good quality routes. It has also been found that some of these routes were very hard indeed although as with all grading a good deal of subjectivity is involved before grades settle. Franco is following a similar path in North Yorkshire, developing lines he is interested in and not worrying too much about what others think (although he must be a bit bothered because otherwise his blog wouldn't be public).

I wonder what you consider your legacy to be beyond a few nasty remarks written on an internet forum? Perhaps I am just stirring the pot with this last remark. I am not sure that either you or Franco are strangers to this. Perhaps a holiday together at some kind of North Yorkshire couples retreat could help solve your issues, cement your relationship and share 'the spirit of the moors'.

James

In reply to Goucho:



Yes. This saga is reminding me of other faces that didn't initially fit such as Alan Mullin and John Dunne.

In reply to james mann:
Where have I put any 'nasty remarks'? Questions yes, but at no point have I ever stooped to nasty or vicious. However, a wet weekend in Scarborough sounds tempting...

Andy F

In reply to Removed User:

... and you could add the Woodwards too? Similar 'wild' grades, some of which turned out to be right (some didn't and some were probably illusionary!)

In reply to andy farnell:

I wonder what you consider your legacy to be beyond a few nasty remarks written on an internet forum? Perhaps I am just stirring the pot with this last remark.

I don't genuinely think you have made nasty remarks. I was just being controversial. Do relate run mini-breaks?

In all honesty though grades given by first ascentionists are always open to a little unreliability. Hopefully in the end the recently developed moor's routes will be repeated and will be judged on their quality rather than the grade. I think that major difference between Franco giving this a big number and others doing the same is that no money or sponsorship is involved. I suspect the attention being lavished upon his new route has increased the chances of a repeat by about 1000fold.

James

In reply to andy farnell:



Then what should he do, put them up as E7? Since he only has national reference to E6, as you claim and as such can only say if the grade's equal to E1 to E6, or if its harder than his "national reference" E6, call it E7? That'd be far off the actual grade...

Bullshit. If he thinks it's E10, he should put it up as E10. And if proven wrong later on, so be it, and even then, if he put up a new route, he would be free to give it E10 or whatever again. And he might have more doubters then, but he'd still be free to give it the grade he wants. But for now, he hasn't given a wrong grade. His previous E10 wasn't really downgraded as you put it, there was a very specific type of gear necessary and that made it E8. Can't really blame Franco for not knowing/not having that piece of gear. I even heard he did quite some research to find a piece to protect that mono with while working the route.

In reply to HosteDenis:


Really? A filed down slider, iirc? I feel ridiculous commenting on this, because I climb nothing like these grades and I live on the other side of the world… but I remember that controversy well (saddo!).

At the time I remember thinking why FC didn't use something like a modified slider nut. I didn't know if they were still around and it seemed so obvious, yet no one said it, that I didn't mention it, as I thought I must be off the mark, being a middle-aged bumbler.

Then Dave Birkett comes along and uses a filed-down slider nut.
Crowd reacts like he invented cold fusion.
I remember thinking, "WTF? Is that it?".

I would have thought that E10 to E8 was a 'significant' downgrade, given how these things are measured, parsed and perceived. I put the inverted commas around 'significant' because it's a relative thing - it's just bloody climbing, it's not important enough to hurt people over.

Franco is clearly climbing very hard, so good on him. Maybe some people have sour memories of his brash earlier posts on UKC years ago, which they should let go of. Maybe Andy Farnell has a point about judging grades, even if he's not putting his case well. Maybe he should let it go anyway. Maybe there's a huge untapped market in slider nuts.

In reply to Damo:

The point that Farnell never seems to get no matter how many times it is spelled out to him, is that the grade was actually pretty accurate for not having that specialist gear. And since it's apparently the accuracy he's questioning it should really be acknowledged that the grade 'for a solo' was pretty much bang on.

There's also the separate question of whether one should grade for use of gear which is not on the market.

In reply to HosteDenis:



The voice of reason once again. I don't think Andy F has ever came up with an answer to your first question. Other than saying he should go and repeat stuff, of course. But at this moment in time, in the absence of that 'evidence' he is much better taking his best stab at the grade rather than either giving it something ridiculously low or declining to offer a grade (what use would that be?).

In reply to Michael Gordon: What you don't seem to perceive is that an E8 was soloed. If you solo an E3 it doesn't make it E5.

Andy F

In reply to HosteDenis: He should go and try other E10's before offering the grade. How many has he tried? How can he offer a grade he has no experience of? Every other climber who has offered big number has done other big numbers, or tried other peoples big numbers. This is not the case here. There is no benchmarking so how can the grade be offered?

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

I think you have made your point, now leave it be. You are coming across as obsessive, and not in a good way. Just my opinion.

In reply to andy farnell:

I'd leave it if I were you Andy. For what it's worth I agree with you to a point but, as you say, E10 is a big number and if Franco were to take you up on your suggestion and subsequently ended up in hospital (or worse, dead) trying to repeat say The Indian Face or Mawson's new E10 in Pembroke, then imagine how you'd feel.

People climb for personal reasons and the grade, although important, is not worth this much discussion or hype. Franco obviously chooses to push himself on the Moors new routes and that's up to him. If his routes are repeated and found to be off the mark then it will all come out in the end, but it's not worth goading him into doing dangerous routes that he may not want to do which could have serious consequences.

In reply to andy farnell:

>

That is not answering the question.

In reply to andy farnell:


yep you don't get it.

In reply to Damo:

Just for the record, it was "an old piece of gear similar to a slider" rather than just a slider.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68270

I get some of what the point AF is trying to make, but don't see why FC should have to prove himself on other E10s, the argument should be about the route not the climber.
A much better and more positive solution would be for other established top trad climbers (in addition to DB) trying Franco's routes. After all it's not too far from Sheffield to the N York Moors.

In reply to ali k:


Totally agree. If he's made honest mistakes, so be it, big deal. On the evidence so far, there seems nothing wrong with his grading. But time will tell. Far more importantly, he's been honest, right down the line. He doesn't need to 'prove' himself on other peoples' dangerous routes. Anybody who's put their neck on the line would probably agree that the only good reason is that you want to do it for your own satisfaction, not other people's opinions. The latter is an invitation to disaster.

Mick

In reply to andy farnell:

Andy, a modest suggestion. (If it's already been made, I apologise.) Why don't you hop over to the moors (not a million miles away from you), lob a rope down some of Franco's routes and have a neb/play around on a shunt? You'll pretty quickly be able to give them sport grades for physicality. Likewise, you'll be able to tell how good (or not!) the gear is. So you'd be able to assign rough grades.

If I was doing this, as a geriatric punter, I'd at least be able to have E7 as a cut-off, i.e. I'd be able to grade them pretty accurately to E7. I'm guessing that, with the likes of E9 and E10, everything would just look utterly horrendous. Now you're a much, much better climber than me, so you could probably do a whole lot better. I'm guessing you could identify routes very accurately indeed, in terms of knowing whether they were at least E8.

If more empiricism was needed, you could first have a day down at, say, Nesscliffe. Lots of E7s and E8s there, surely, to have as benchmarks. All you have to do is have a look, play around on a shunt, check physicality, check gear, make up your mind. But they'd give rough benchmarks for Franco's routes on the moors.

Lastly, although you've always insisted it's not personal (and one takes your word on this), why not meet up with Franco and his mates and have some fun days out? Nobody needs to prove anything to anyone. Just meet the guy, do some easy routes, have a few pints, maybe even force a pie on him (Lord knows, he still looks as though he's in dire need of pies.)

Mick

In reply to anyone:

I asked this further up the thread but didn't get a reply so am reposting:

"Can you clarify what is meant by the phrase 'the Line of bolts...has gradually come out' in the route description?
...Was the whole route originally bolted or just sections of it?"

In reply to Fraser:

Was the whole route originally bolted or just sections of it?"

Here's a photo of it: -

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uRHh-By91Fo/T3I1rin51lI/AAAAAAAABvk/mr0gWAZ6_60/s...

In reply to FactorXXX:

I'm a bit confused now. That shows a line slanting L > R whereas the photo of Franco climbing the route looks like the route goes R > L? Have I missed something? Are these two different routes?

In reply to andy farnell:



Heartless Hare ** E5 5c

Rockfax Description
The left-hand side of the slab is a bold undertaking passing a ledge then two tiny left-facing flakes. Often climbed with side-runners (as high as your conscience allows) at a friendlier E3

Heartless Hare (E5 5c)

In reply to Mick Ward:

Brings back memories of the SouthWest mega grade debate when the Edwards appeared to be putting up routes 2 grades harder than anywhere else in the country. Solution then was for people to try the routes!

In reply to jon:

Depends where the holds for climbing go, surely? The bolts look like they the old very narrow ones (~6mm?) which you'd struggle to use as a hold. I am conjecturing here though.
I think the locals to Taipan Wall have little need to save up for a flight

In reply to FactorXXX:



Cheers, that's a lot of bolts! (the perched block up top looks nice and teetery too!) I too am slightly confused about the apparent discrepancy between the line of the bolts and the line of Franco's lead photos.