[pure-silver] Re: stopbath kills fixer
- From: Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:20:27 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
-----Original Message-----
From: Ryuji Suzuki <rs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Jan 24, 2005 9:22 PM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: stopbath kills fixer
From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: stopbath kills fixer
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:35:26 -0800
> One might argue that, given the provision that _my_=20
> understanding is, in fact, correct, that my posting of=20
> information saves those who are too lazy from having to do=20
> their own research. There is probably some truth to this.=20
> However, the same point can be made about any published=20
> material. Books like Mees's famous _Theory of the=20
> Photogaphic Process_ are really collections of the condensed=20
> research of many others. Much, if not most, of the material=20
> in that book, as well as others, comes from published=20
> journal articles, which, in theory at least, were available=20
> at the time of printing, to readers. Why should they not=20
> have to do the research required to collect and read all=20
> this matrial? One can take this further but I think the=20
> point has been made.
I find books like Mees or James are good starting point but very often
I don't get enough details of each research and have to get the
original paper. Even as simple as washing fixers, you need to know at
what condition the experiment was done, so that you can relate their
data to practice. Reading the original paper is essential if the
information is crucial to the particular issue at hand. Plus, a lot of
things in Mees and James are outdated and new data and insights are
published since then. This does not diminish the value of their work
but it just requires a lot more to get updated information. This is a
good thing because we have more new knowledge we can use.
Now are you saying that I'm not disseminating enough information?
I simply wanted to know if the information was for some problem at
hand or to satisfy own curiosity or just for the sake of another
discussion over the topic at another place. Depending on the answer I
might want to post my contribution where the discussion is already
taking place. What is wrong with that?
--
Ryuji Suzuki
"Keep a good head and always carry a light camera."
I agree with completely about the limitations of books. I also think, an=
d know you agree, that looking at original publications is important for th=
e reasons you stated and because one never knows if the person quoting them=
has got it wrong. I also agree with you that the classic texts are getting=
pretty old. At least some of the information has been supplanted by newer =
understanding. The problem for the non-specialist, in which catagory I incl=
ude myself, is to know where to go. This is where someone like you can be v=
ery helpful. Both in directing one to sources and in giving at least a supe=
rficial critique of whether the particular articles or books are worthwhile=
.=20
As to the second issue. Perhaps it would have been better to ask directl=
y if the poster was having a practical problem and if so what it was. I th=
ink sometimes you don't give out enough information considering the lack of=
specialized knowledge in groups like this. Of course it would be different=
if you were taking part in a specialized group dedicated to, say, advanced=
organic chemistry, or something similar. There, one could rightly expect a=
ll members to be in possesion of a certain amount of essential knowledge. H=
ere, and in similar groups, the main interest is for non-specialists to lea=
rn more about a rather complex subject. Perhaps out of pure curiousity or f=
or the practical purpose of making better photographs. Please understand th=
at subjects which may be very easy for you to understand may be far from ea=
sy or obvious to others. If you can offer some guidance to them you would b=
e providing an exceptionally valuable service. Challenging someone's intell=
ectual curiousity is proper and valuable but the problem may not be a lack =
of curiousity or mental laziness but a lack of just plain information about=
how to go about finding answers. I like using Socratic method myself but s=
ometimes what someone needs is just a bump in the right direction.
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Los Angeles, CA, USA
=============================================================================================================
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:
