Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)

Michael Scarpitti wrote:
Peter De Smidt pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote in message ...

Michael Scarpitti wrote:

The 'tone' of hostility comes from the rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth
zonehead klansmen who won't tolerate for a moment the possibility that
everything they 'know' is wrong.

A brief look at the treads you've taken part in show that it's you who's
done most of the "foaming-at-the-mouth". Moreover, when have you ever
expressed sentiment that suggested the possibility that everything you
'know' is wrong?


No, because it's based on actual experience, trial and error, not just
reading ansel adams holy writ.



Which is exactly the experience that many of us here have. I do my own
testing, I plot my own curves, and I correlate it with pictorial
results. I have a large print collection, and so I can compare my work
with fine photographs that exhibit a wide range of styles. I don't care
what someone's theory says if it doesn't work for me. You simply
ascerbically assert that your experience is somehow better than everyone
else's. That's as arrogantly dogmatic as any follower of the zone system.

Your posts have consistently been the most arrogant,
dismissive, vulgar and intollerant in this newsgroup. Try following your
own advice.


Not even close, amico mio. The wretched, automatic dismissal of ANY
questioing of the zoan system comes from the zone klansmen, you know,
the ones wearing their zone ix robes, looking for someone to lynch.
I'm sick of it. I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore!

I've seen very little of this "automatic dismissal" that you say.
People have rejected some of your characterizations of the zone system,
and many people are no doubt goaded by your churlish manner. Big deal.
If people get what you say wrong, wouldn't you be justified in
questioning their assertion? Of course you would. How do you respond to
name calling? You do so in a way that would make a grade schooler proud.
"He started it! I know you are but what am I?..." Try treating others as
you would like to be treated. Naw, there's not chance of that.

You regularly fight strawmen. I'll give an example. You often castigate
Zonies for telling people to develop 35mm film to print well on grade II
paper. You suggest grade III. Well, that's hardly news. _Decades_ ago
Fred Picker (Zone VI Studios) recommended exactly the same, and he was a
Zonie if anyone was.

Here's another example, you castigate Zonies for using contractions,
when Ansel Adams clearly recognized exactly the same problems that you
mention, although he saw them decades earlier. In fact John Sexton, who
you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. You don't like
his subject matter? Big deal. I don't like yours. So what.

Over the past year or so, I've occasionally tried to discuss things like
a reasonable adult with you despite the overwelming evidence that you're
a malicious kook. I can see, though, that's there's no point in this.
Hence from now on I'll take my own advice and ignore you.

-Peter De Smidt

Michael Scarpitti wrote:
Peter De Smidt pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote in message ...

Michael Scarpitti wrote:

The 'tone' of hostility comes from the rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth
zonehead klansmen who won't tolerate for a moment the possibility that
everything they 'know' is wrong.

A brief look at the treads you've taken part in show that it's you who's
done most of the "foaming-at-the-mouth". Moreover, when have you ever
expressed sentiment that suggested the possibility that everything you
'know' is wrong?


No, because it's based on actual experience, trial and error, not just
reading ansel adams holy writ.



Which is exactly the experience that many of us here have. I do my own
testing, I plot my own curves, and I correlate it with pictorial
results. I have a large print collection, and so I can compare my work
with fine photographs that exhibit a wide range of styles. I don't care
what someone's theory says if it doesn't work for me. You simply
ascerbically assert that your experience is somehow better than everyone
else's. That's as arrogantly dogmatic as any follower of the zone system.

Your posts have consistently been the most arrogant,
dismissive, vulgar and intollerant in this newsgroup. Try following your
own advice.


Not even close, amico mio. The wretched, automatic dismissal of ANY
questioing of the zoan system comes from the zone klansmen, you know,
the ones wearing their zone ix robes, looking for someone to lynch.
I'm sick of it. I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore!

I've seen very little of this "automatic dismissal" that you say.
People have rejected some of your characterizations of the zone system,
and many people are no doubt goaded by your churlish manner. Big deal.
If people get what you say wrong, wouldn't you be justified in
questioning their assertion? Of course you would. How do you respond to
name calling? You do so in a way that would make a grade schooler proud.
"He started it! I know you are but what am I?..." Try treating others as
you would like to be treated. Naw, there's not chance of that.

You regularly fight strawmen. I'll give an example. You often castigate
Zonies for telling people to develop 35mm film to print well on grade II
paper. You suggest grade III. Well, that's hardly news. _Decades_ ago
Fred Picker (Zone VI Studios) recommended exactly the same, and he was a
Zonie if anyone was.

Here's another example, you castigate Zonies for using contractions,
when Ansel Adams clearly recognized exactly the same problems that you
mention, although he saw them decades earlier. In fact John Sexton, who
you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. You don't like
his subject matter? Big deal. I don't like yours. So what.

Over the past year or so, I've occasionally tried to discuss things like
a reasonable adult with you despite the overwelming evidence that you're
a malicious kook. I can see, though, that's there's no point in this.
Hence from now on I'll take my own advice and ignore you.

-Peter De Smidt

"Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote:

[...] In fact John Sexton, who
you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. [...]

I can believe that. It's my favorite technique for severe ranges, too.

However, it's interesting that JOBO carries a testimonial by Sexton and a
pointer to his Places... book. How can one have minimal agitation in a
JOBO?

"Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote:

[...] In fact John Sexton, who
you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. [...]

I can believe that. It's my favorite technique for severe ranges, too.

However, it's interesting that JOBO carries a testimonial by Sexton and a
pointer to his Places... book. How can one have minimal agitation in a
JOBO?

jjs wrote:
: "Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote:

: [...] In fact John Sexton, who
: you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
: minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
: scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. [...]

: I can believe that. It's my favorite technique for severe ranges, too.

To bad scarpitti doesn't believe in contration. His advice earlier in the thread is to
not worry about the contrast of the scene and simply let the highlights blow out.


: However, it's interesting that JOBO carries a testimonial by Sexton and a
: pointer to his Places... book. How can one have minimal agitation in a
: JOBO?

You can turn off the motor. :-)

--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

jjs wrote:
: "Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote:

: [...] In fact John Sexton, who
: you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
: minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
: scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. [...]

: I can believe that. It's my favorite technique for severe ranges, too.

To bad scarpitti doesn't believe in contration. His advice earlier in the thread is to
not worry about the contrast of the scene and simply let the highlights blow out.


: However, it's interesting that JOBO carries a testimonial by Sexton and a
: pointer to his Places... book. How can one have minimal agitation in a
: JOBO?

You can turn off the motor. :-)

--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

jjs wrote:
"Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote:


[...] In fact John Sexton, who
you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. [...]


I can believe that. It's my favorite technique for severe ranges, too.

However, it's interesting that JOBO carries a testimonial by Sexton and a
pointer to his Places... book. How can one have minimal agitation in a
JOBO?



For these situations Sexton didn't use a Jobo. (I use the past tense
simply since I don't know if he still does this.) He used a homemade
plastic print "slosher". This is basically a plastic holder that keeps
a number of negatives separate. They sit face up in the slosher. You
then place the whole holder in a tray of developer and agitate by moving
the slosher around. Either Howard Bond or Phil Davis did a review of
various "sloshers" in one of the darkroom magazines a few years ago.
Maybe someone will chime in with the info.

-Peter

jjs wrote:
"Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote:


[...] In fact John Sexton, who
you childishly denigrate, regularly avoids extreme contractions by using
minimal agitation in a very dilute developer to deal with high contrast
scenes, as can be seen in his _Places of Power_ book. [...]


I can believe that. It's my favorite technique for severe ranges, too.

However, it's interesting that JOBO carries a testimonial by Sexton and a
pointer to his Places... book. How can one have minimal agitation in a
JOBO?



For these situations Sexton didn't use a Jobo. (I use the past tense
simply since I don't know if he still does this.) He used a homemade
plastic print "slosher". This is basically a plastic holder that keeps
a number of negatives separate. They sit face up in the slosher. You
then place the whole holder in a tray of developer and agitate by moving
the slosher around. Either Howard Bond or Phil Davis did a review of
various "sloshers" in one of the darkroom magazines a few years ago.
Maybe someone will chime in with the info.

-Peter

Frank Pittel wrote:


To bad scarpitti doesn't believe in contration. His advice earlier in the thread is to
not worry about the contrast of the scene and simply let the highlights blow out.



That's not exactly fair. MS advocates using an 's' curved film with
'compensating' development. Since he admits that he's never run real
tests, though, and since he's using a paper with very low highlight
contrast (Ilford RC), it's an open question as to whether his
development technique gives any "compensation" at all. If my memory
serves me rightly, his web examples showed that he simply wrote off
shadow detail. If you rate the film speed high enough, develop it to a
low contrast, and print on a paper with low highlight contrast, I doubt
that he gets all that many blown hightlights. That is assuming that he
actually still takes pictures.

-Peter

"Peter De Smidt" pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote in message
...

For these situations Sexton didn't use a Jobo. (I use the past tense
simply since I don't know if he still does this.) He used a homemade
plastic print "slosher". This is basically a plastic holder that keeps
a number of negatives separate. [...]

Got one. I posted a picture of it a few days ago
..