[pure-silver] Re: TMAX grain - developer modification?
- From: Christopher Woodhouse <chris.woodhouse@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:39:39 +0100
A few observations, my two pennies worth.
I started this thread on a very practical basis. It seems to be deviating
into a game of intellectual cyber tennis, which IMHO for practical purposes,
is of lesser importance.
I really abhor the dumbing down which occurs in magazines and it is a
blessing to be in the company of knowledgeable, helpful enthusiasts.
However, the trick of a successful mailing list is to try and be
informative, helpful, relevant and inclusive, hopefully at the same time.
Most things have been discussed before but maybe not fully or maybe not from
a particular viewpoint. Even if it has, many of us have full time lives
outside photography and do not have contiguous involvement with the mail
list contents. It would be a shame if people held back in case their were
accused of not paying attention at the back of the class.
Anyway, I will test the alkalinity of Ultrafin and find out its constituents
for those who may be interested. Although fairly unknown, it was the late
Barry Thornton's concentrate developer of choice before he started with his
own DiXactol range.
Regards Chris Woodhouse
On 11/10/04 5:22 am, "Ryuji Suzuki" <rs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: TMAX grain - developer modification?
> Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:38:56 -0700
>
>> Well, without the aid of an electron microcope one can not
>> be sure but certainly Tri-X seems to have this problem when
>> developed in very alkaline developers like Rodinal. Of
>> course, you are right, I am assuming text book research
>> describes phemomonon that occur in actual practice.
>
> The reason I asked is that we already discussed about this issue
> before, either here or at another list, and you are repeating it.
> Last time I pointed out that Trivelli and others were studying grain
> morphology and photographic properties of emulsions and he found no
> instance of grain clumping despite very early reports on such a
> phenomenon from 1910's or 1920's. I was wondering if you had any
> further evidence that requires to change the view. I think I gave you
> the reference last time, but it's published in J. Franklin Institute.
>
>> A couple of years ago Kodak released some advertising
>> which mentioned D-76. I don't remember the details but they
>> had the date wrong by several years.
>
> That just means that at least one bozo at Kodak advertising department
> didn't know about it and it doesn't mean no one at Kodak knew about
> it. Papers written by Kodak researchers such as Levenson about history
> of developers correctly credit Capstaff's work.
>
> --
> Ryuji Suzuki
> "Keep a good head and always carry a light camera."
> ==============================================================================
> ===============================
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
> account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
> and unsubscribe from there.
>
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
