[pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 16:40:47 -0800
----- Original Message -----
From: "Janet Cull" <jcull@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:14 PM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
Richard, does the hc110 age seem ok to you? If I marked
it correctly, it was Sept 06. Doesn't seem like it was
that long ago. Maybe I've done it since and that's an
old date, but I'll have to assume it's 9/06 since that's
the last mark.
Thanks!
Janet
Thats about 5 months. If you have any left make a "clip
test". Take a scrap of 35mm film (or actually any film but
35 is convenient) and develop it in a little of the
developer. The light struck scrap should become very black
in normal development time. If the developer has become weak
with age the film will come out gray.
In general diluted developers don't last long. That is
because the actual amount of Sulfite or other preservative
in it is not sufficient to absorb all the oxygen its exposed
to. I don't have expected life figures for HC-110 at working
solution but they are probably not more than six months in a
filled and sealed container. Kodak's age predictions are
quite conservative and usually developers will last quite a
bit longer than the chart ages indicate, but, the longer any
developer sits around the more likely it is to have oxidized
and lost some strength.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
=============================================================================================================
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.
- References:
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Janet Cull
Other related posts:
- » [pure-silver] under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
Thanks! Janet
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Janet Cull