Statement: Company X has a record of camera quality and modernization to help ensure you do not miss a single shot even in bad weather.\nConclusions:\nI) No other company has any recognition in the camera industry.\nII) Any common person can take good photographs using camera X.

Introduction / Context:
The manufacturer’s boasting statement is promotional: quality and modernization reduce missed shots even in adverse conditions. We must test whether exclusivity in industry recognition or universal user success follows from this claim.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Company X: quality and modernization benefits.
• No comparative data about other brands’ recognition.
• No assertion that any novice will take “good photographs” merely by using X.

Concept / Approach:
Conclusion I (“no other company has recognition”) contradicts market reality and is not stated. Conclusion II imputes outcome guarantees about user skill, which depends on technique, framing, and experience—beyond equipment quality. Hence neither follows.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Separate product claims (fewer missed shots) from industry-wide exclusivity or user-skill guarantees.2) Reject I and II as overreaches.

Verification / Alternative check:
A superior camera can still yield poor photos if misused; and other firms can also be recognized.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Accepting I or II would import unsupported extremes.

Common Pitfalls:
Taking ad copy as proof of market exclusivity or as a substitute for skill.

Final Answer:
Neither conclusion follows.