[pure-silver] Re: Tri X film versions and sizes
- From: "Koch, Gerald" <gkoch02@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:53:05 -0500
"PMK ..., which also largely based on metol"
I would not characterize PMK as a Metol developer it contains 10 times
as much pyrogallol as it does Metol.
Jerry
-----Original Message-----
From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christopher
Woodhouse
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 2:45 PM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Tri X film versions and sizes
Interesting. I used Perceptol extensively and always was led to believe
that Microdol-X was another metol-only formula. When I use dilute
Perceptol (1+3) I can always rely on it taming the highlight density and
producing a distinct shoulder. Even my tests with PMK had the same
affect, which also largely based on metol.
I'll just have to go and try it. All I need is a sunny day in the UK!
On 16/2/05 12:21 am, "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>=20
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christopher Woodhouse" <chris.woodhouse@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 12:27 PM
> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Tri X film versions and sizes
>=20
>=20
>> So, even with a roll-off type type developer like Microdol X, Tri=20
>> X320 in 5x4 is not going to be suitable for landscape work on
>> anything but the
>> dullest day. That was a near miss, thanks. Looks like I'm
>> down to the Tmax's
>> and Acros that are available in 120 and 5x4 if I'm going
>> to give Ilford the
>> heave-ho.
>>=20
>>=20
>> On 15/2/05 12:55 am, "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>=20
>> wrote:
>>=20
>>>=20
> It depends on the landscape. Tri-X will produce very dramatic=20
> pictures of subjects like white-capped waves and snow on mountains.=20
> I've used Plus-X for general 8x10 work because I was able to buy a=20
> large stash of the stuff outdated many years ago. The pictures look OK
> but I liked Agfapan better.
> Microdol-X does not act as a compensating developer,
> i.e., does not shoulder off. Perhaps it does in high
> dilutions. At 1:3 it becomes an acutance developer but is no
> longer any finer grained than D-76 (of no consequence for
> LF). Actually, I always liked the results I got from
> Microdol-X.
> I think you have to shoot some Tri-X sheet and, perhaps
> shoot the same images with something else, and compar the
> two to see the difference. It may be pretty subtle.
>=20
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>=20
> =
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> =
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> 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.
>=20
--=20
Regards Chris Woodhouse
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
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:
