If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Peter De Smidt wrote: jjs wrote: Because softened water lacks the minerals that remove hypo/fix. I'm surprised that people don't know that. I don't think it's so simple. In fact there's just been a technical discussion on this on the Pure-Silver mailing list. While it's true that, for example, sea water will wash photographic materials faster than demineralized water when a wash aid isn't used, it's not clear that there's any advantage to using mineralized water after a wash aid. Both sea water and HCA facilitate washing through ion exchange. Sodium sulfite is used because it has always been known that salts facilitated washing, even before sea water was used. The ion exchange takes place in the HCA making it easier to wash out thiosulfate or silver-thiosulfate complexes, so I wouldn't think the relative hardness or softeness of the water would make much difference. Morever, softened water isn't de-mineralized. The mineral makeup is changed to something less likely to cause build up and hard water stains. I forget the exact details. Finally, it's my experience that very hard water, like I have here, can cause problems when washing paper. When I switched to softened water for washing paper, these problems went away. Most hard water (at least in cities) is probably softened to some degree anyway. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Sadly our planet with its attendent population growth, cannot sustain
wasting water like this for much longer. Of course the larger issue here is, are your prints worth processing to an archival standard? Put more simply, will anyone be interested in your prints after you die? If not, save the water. Mark |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Tom Phillips wrote (in part):
Most hard water (at least in cities) is probably softened to some degree anyway. I do not know about that. I do know that some cities deliberately harden the water a little so the lead used to solder copper pipes does not come out in solution and poison their customers. Presumably newer solders do not contain lead, but if they contain cadmium, bismuth, etc., I would not want that in my water either. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 07:55:00 up 41 days, 16:12, 4 users, load average: 4.18, 4.32, 4.65 |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
ups.com... Sadly our planet with its attendent population growth, cannot sustain wasting water like this for much longer. Of course the larger issue here is, are your prints worth processing to an archival standard? Put more simply, will anyone be interested in your prints after you die? If not, save the water. I have had the same thought so many times, but look at it another way: the longer you wash a print, the cleaner the water becomes so that in the end you are simply putting clean water back into the ecosystem. Regardless, please do wash your negatives thoroughly - for posterity. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
In article . com,
wrote: Sadly our planet with its attendent population growth, cannot sustain wasting water like this for much longer. Of course the larger issue here is, are your prints worth processing to an archival standard? Put more simply, will anyone be interested in your prints after you die? If not, save the water. Excuse me, but what a crock. You make it sound as though he's destroying a rare natural resource, instead of adding almost immeasurable amounts of impurities to the most common substance on the planet. All but the first minutes worth of washwater would still qualify as potable. I'm all for not UNECESSARILY wasting resources, but to suggest he needs to evaluate the societal worth of each print before washing it is extreme. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
In article . com,
wrote: Sadly our planet with its attendent population growth, cannot sustain wasting water like this for much longer. Of course the larger issue here is, are your prints worth processing to an archival standard? Put more simply, will anyone be interested in your prints after you die? If not, save the water. Excuse me, but what a crock. You make it sound as though he's destroying a rare natural resource, instead of adding almost immeasurable amounts of impurities to the most common substance on the planet. All but the first minutes worth of washwater would still qualify as potable. I'm all for not UNECESSARILY wasting resources, but to suggest he needs to evaluate the societal worth of each print before washing it is extreme. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
In article . com,
wrote: Sadly our planet with its attendent population growth, cannot sustain wasting water like this for much longer. Of course the larger issue here is, are your prints worth processing to an archival standard? Put more simply, will anyone be interested in your prints after you die? If not, save the water. Mark Complete and total Bull ****. Water can be easily recycled. Using solar power. The thing thats lacking is creative thought. -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
In article . com,
wrote: Sadly our planet with its attendent population growth, cannot sustain wasting water like this for much longer. Of course the larger issue here is, are your prints worth processing to an archival standard? Put more simply, will anyone be interested in your prints after you die? If not, save the water. Mark Complete and total Bull ****. Water can be easily recycled. Using solar power. The thing thats lacking is creative thought. -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Jean-David Beyer wrote: Eugene Atget would never thought his work was worth processing to archival standards. He thought his work was just record shots from which painters could copy details for their own work. Yet modern scholarship and museum creators highly value his work. You just never know how the future will treat your work. Of course, if yours is as poorly organized as mine, it will all be trashed when I die. But so will the Edward Weston and the Ansel Adams prints I have, because my estate will not know their value. If you have published work you will be remembered regardless of short comings. Look at Joseph Sudeck he had a complete horrible mess of stacked disorganized prints,...He is a very well known photographer in the Czech Republic and here. -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ink Jet Prints Problems | Marshall Thurman | Digital Photography | 27 | August 16th 04 11:05 PM |
Digital darkroom | Paul Friday | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 84 | July 9th 04 05:26 AM |
below $1000 film vs digital | Mike Henley | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 182 | June 25th 04 03:37 AM |
Original B&W Fiber Based Prints For Auction! | Mark Baylin | General Equipment For Sale | 4 | April 19th 04 11:27 PM |
fiber based photo paper | Monkey | Film & Labs | 5 | February 2nd 04 01:59 PM |