"Andrew Price" <ajprice@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:netkv39v96aeiapvvfr94fchk837nn5cvt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 18:26:09 -0500, <Pico> wrote:
>
>>> and then compensate for the actual temperature of your basement, using
>>> their time/temperature chart:
>>>
>>> <http://www.digitaltruth.com/images/time.gif>
>>
>>And keep your fingers crossed and hope by chance the chart is right.
>
> It's a starting point, nothing more. Most people who are seriously
> interested in developing their own film take notes and compare the
> results at different temperatures and dilutions.
It may be a stopping point. If the full chemistry isn't active at 60F,
nothing might happen.
> But over the short temperature range quoted (+14 to +24) it is a
> starting point, and one recommended by Ilford and other manufacturers
> of black and white film.
Bull****. Those are the recommended ranges, bottom and top, not higher and
not lower than that range.
>>Some of their film development specs are flat out guesses,
>
> Hmm... sup****ting data?
>
>>some upon
>>a recommendation of a quesitonable source.
>
> Do you have any convincing sup****ting evidence of that assertion?
I would, but I forgot the guy's name. Spanky or something like Uranium
Committee. Yep, that's a pseudo he used. Search for 'dougnut boy', his
lifelong masterpiece done in high school fifty years ago.
>>One of those sources is a
>>hairbrained maniac who frequented this place and hasn't developed a roll
>>of
>>film for forty years.
>
> Being more specific would add credulity to that statement.
I wrote that I would if I could recall his name, but some things are worth
forgetting. I don't know how long you have been around, and I don't want
to
bother looking, but you might remember if you ... wait, It is Michael
something.
>>Pure impressionism.
>
> Indeed - but whose?
Michael S (spook, spoor, smegma, something)
|
