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 |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
Robert Vervoordt wrote in message . ..
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:25:03 -0500, Frank Pittel wrote: Robert: 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. Their cherished, deeply-held beliefs about exposure and development are in fact a religious cult. They continue empty, meaningless, ritualistic practices that have no relationship to or function for modern materials and equipment. They 'place' this and and 'let fall' that and speak in Roman Numerals about 'zones'. The 'True Believer' will not listen, because he is faithful and devout. He meets any scientific criticism with animosity, bile, and hatred. They have their bible (White's 'Zone System Manual'), their hymnal (Adams's 'The Negative), and their high priest (John Sexton) a dsiciple of their prophet (Adams). Why it is necessary for me to point out the zoneheads' religious cult? Is the world so ****ing blind? |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
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? Your posts have consistently been the most arrogant, dismissive, vulgar and intollerant in this newsgroup. Try following your own advice. -Peter De Smidt |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
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? Your posts have consistently been the most arrogant, dismissive, vulgar and intollerant in this newsgroup. Try following your own advice. -Peter De Smidt |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
Frank Pittel wrote in message ...
I have spoken with Bill Troop several times. As far as proprietary developers are concerned, I disagree that there is any reason to avoid them. The best developers are proprietary. That's why they're proprietary! I have also told him that his statements about 'less silver' being the main motivation for Kodak's creation of T-Max films is quite absurd. He does not dismiss T-grain films out of hand, but points out several real problems with them, problems that I have observed myself. Most of these pertain to the characteristic curves, and this is principally a problem with TMY. There are also problems that he points out with fine detail. TMY DOES 'sag' in the mid-tones (compared to conventional films such as Tri-X Pan), and ALL of Kodak's curves show this! Here's Tri-X Pan in T-Max developer: http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...009_0490ac.gif Note the slope decreases as density increases. Here's TMY in T-Max developer: http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...002_0507ac.gif Note how throughout most of the middle tones the slope is increasing. There is no escaping the fact that these films offer different curve shapes, and that the middle tones of TMY are softer in contrast than they are with Tri-X, whose highlights are softer in contrast instead. Films with the Tri-X kind of curve shape are OBVIOUSLY better suited to outdoor work, because flare tends to reduce contrast in the shadow/mid-tone areas (where the contrast of TMY is already low). Clouds, on the other hand, will be denser in the TMY negative, making them in some cases too hard to print. No 'mastery' of technique or zone system manipulations will alter the fact that these films have an inherent difference in their curve shapes. What 'contradictions' to Kodak's B&W films book have you found in my statements? An older edition of the book (from the 1960's) goes into considerable detail about the various curve shapes Kodak films have and why they are suited for various applications (indoor, outdoor, portrait, copying, etc.), and they mention specifically the problem of flare on outdoor work, in particular flare from light striking the inside of the bellows. Kodak specifically points out that certain films are superior and others are worse in dealing with this problem. The kinds of films that are superior have curve shapes like Tri-X. The kinds that are inferior for outdoor work are ones with curve shapes like TMY. Kodak used to make many types of sheet films, all with different curve shapes for different applications. Since there is so little demand today for sheet films, the range of materials has been reduced considerably. Kodak's current marketing takes no account of these past products, and suggests the few remaining films be used for a wider range of applications than they did in the past. Make of that what you will. It does not alter thae fact that the shape of the TMY curve is less suited for outdoor work than that of Tri-X Pan (the 35mm/120 format emulsion, not the sheet film emulsion, which has a curve shape more like that of TMY): http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...009_0504ac.gif Now, if you THINK you know what you're talking about, you don't. I DO! |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:42:40 -0500, Peter De Smidt
pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote: 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? Your posts have consistently been the most arrogant, dismissive, vulgar and intollerant in this newsgroup. Try following your own advice. -Peter De Smidt Oh, yeah, beside John Douglas, there was another who asked me to refrain from replying to MS. You were right, Pete, so I forgive you for this lapse. Robert Vervoordt, MFA |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:42:40 -0500, Peter De Smidt
pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote: 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? Your posts have consistently been the most arrogant, dismissive, vulgar and intollerant in this newsgroup. Try following your own advice. -Peter De Smidt Oh, yeah, beside John Douglas, there was another who asked me to refrain from replying to MS. You were right, Pete, so I forgive you for this lapse. Robert Vervoordt, MFA |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:42:40 -0500, Peter De Smidt
pdesmidt*no*spam*@tds.*net* wrote: 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? Your posts have consistently been the most arrogant, dismissive, vulgar and intollerant in this newsgroup. Try following your own advice. -Peter De Smidt Oh, yeah, beside John Douglas, there was another who asked me to refrain from replying to MS. You were right, Pete, so I forgive you for this lapse. Robert Vervoordt, MFA |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
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. 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! |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: Frank Pittel wrote in message ... : I have spoken with Bill Troop several times. As far as proprietary : developers are concerned, I disagree that there is any reason to avoid : them. The best developers are proprietary. That's why they're : proprietary! : I have also told him that his statements about 'less silver' being the : main motivation for Kodak's creation of T-Max films is quite absurd. : He does not dismiss T-grain films out of hand, but points out several : real problems with them, problems that I have observed myself. Most of : these pertain to the characteristic curves, and this is principally a : problem with TMY. There are also problems that he points out with fine : detail. The book gives less then a page to T grain film and then claims that while the 3200 speed films are the most useful the film manufactureres could produce a conventional film just as fast. That's the last they mention T grain film. : TMY DOES 'sag' in the mid-tones (compared to conventional films such : as Tri-X Pan), and ALL of Kodak's curves show this! : Here's Tri-X Pan in T-Max developer: : http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...009_0490ac.gif : Note the slope decreases as density increases. : Here's TMY in T-Max developer: : http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...002_0507ac.gif : Note how throughout most of the middle tones the slope is increasing. Take another look at the two charts you provided URLs for. This time take a closer look at the scale at the bottom of the graph. There is also no "sag" in the graph for TMY. : There is no escaping the fact that these films offer different curve : shapes, and that the middle tones of TMY are softer in contrast than : they are with Tri-X, whose highlights are softer in contrast instead. I don't recall anyone arguing that the curves were the same. The primary argument that you degenerated this thread into is your fantasy that TMY wasn't suited to "outdoor" photography. YOu have provided no evidence to support your fantasy. : Films with the Tri-X kind of curve shape are OBVIOUSLY better suited : to outdoor work, because flare tends to reduce contrast in the : shadow/mid-tone areas (where the contrast of TMY is already low). : Clouds, on the other hand, will be denser in the TMY negative, making : them in some cases too hard to print. No 'mastery' of technique or : zone system manipulations will alter the fact that these films have an : inherent difference in their curve shapes. More fantasy. The "flare you are talking about is more commonly referred to as "specular highlights" As a result the midtones aren't effected, only the highlights. The problems that you have with TMY and clouds are your problems. They are easily dealt with when proper filtering and zone system techniques are used. So far the only one here that wants the curves of TMY and tri-x to be the same is you. : What 'contradictions' to Kodak's B&W films book have you found in my : statements? An older edition of the book (from the 1960's) goes into : considerable detail about the various curve shapes Kodak films have : and why they are suited for various applications (indoor, outdoor, : portrait, copying, etc.), and they mention specifically the problem of : flare on outdoor work, in particular flare from light striking the : inside of the bellows. Kodak specifically points out that certain : films are superior and others are worse in dealing with this problem. : The kinds of films that are superior have curve shapes like Tri-X. The : kinds that are inferior for outdoor work are ones with curve shapes : like TMY. We can start with your fantasy that Kodak states that TMY isn't suitable for "outdoor" use. Any book that you have from the '60s is irrelevent to discussions of films like TMY that didn't exist at the time of printing. There is also your claim that the curve for TMY has a "sag" in it. The graph presented in the book clearly demonstrates that there is no "sag" in the curve. : Kodak used to make many types of sheet films, all with different curve : shapes for different applications. Since there is so little demand : today for sheet films, the range of materials has been reduced : considerably. Kodak's current marketing takes no account of these past : products, and suggests the few remaining films be used for a wider : range of applications than they did in the past. Make of that what you : will. It does not alter thae fact that the shape of the TMY curve is : less suited for outdoor work than that of Tri-X Pan (the 35mm/120 : format emulsion, not the sheet film emulsion, which has a curve shape : more like that of TMY): : http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...009_0504ac.gif Once again nobody claimed that the curve for TMY is the same as tri-x. That includes both the sheet and roll film version of the film. Nice try at changing the subject though. : Now, if you THINK you know what you're talking about, you don't. I DO! -- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems)
Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: Frank Pittel wrote in message ... : I have spoken with Bill Troop several times. As far as proprietary : developers are concerned, I disagree that there is any reason to avoid : them. The best developers are proprietary. That's why they're : proprietary! : I have also told him that his statements about 'less silver' being the : main motivation for Kodak's creation of T-Max films is quite absurd. : He does not dismiss T-grain films out of hand, but points out several : real problems with them, problems that I have observed myself. Most of : these pertain to the characteristic curves, and this is principally a : problem with TMY. There are also problems that he points out with fine : detail. The book gives less then a page to T grain film and then claims that while the 3200 speed films are the most useful the film manufactureres could produce a conventional film just as fast. That's the last they mention T grain film. : TMY DOES 'sag' in the mid-tones (compared to conventional films such : as Tri-X Pan), and ALL of Kodak's curves show this! : Here's Tri-X Pan in T-Max developer: : http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...009_0490ac.gif : Note the slope decreases as density increases. : Here's TMY in T-Max developer: : http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...002_0507ac.gif : Note how throughout most of the middle tones the slope is increasing. Take another look at the two charts you provided URLs for. This time take a closer look at the scale at the bottom of the graph. There is also no "sag" in the graph for TMY. : There is no escaping the fact that these films offer different curve : shapes, and that the middle tones of TMY are softer in contrast than : they are with Tri-X, whose highlights are softer in contrast instead. I don't recall anyone arguing that the curves were the same. The primary argument that you degenerated this thread into is your fantasy that TMY wasn't suited to "outdoor" photography. YOu have provided no evidence to support your fantasy. : Films with the Tri-X kind of curve shape are OBVIOUSLY better suited : to outdoor work, because flare tends to reduce contrast in the : shadow/mid-tone areas (where the contrast of TMY is already low). : Clouds, on the other hand, will be denser in the TMY negative, making : them in some cases too hard to print. No 'mastery' of technique or : zone system manipulations will alter the fact that these films have an : inherent difference in their curve shapes. More fantasy. The "flare you are talking about is more commonly referred to as "specular highlights" As a result the midtones aren't effected, only the highlights. The problems that you have with TMY and clouds are your problems. They are easily dealt with when proper filtering and zone system techniques are used. So far the only one here that wants the curves of TMY and tri-x to be the same is you. : What 'contradictions' to Kodak's B&W films book have you found in my : statements? An older edition of the book (from the 1960's) goes into : considerable detail about the various curve shapes Kodak films have : and why they are suited for various applications (indoor, outdoor, : portrait, copying, etc.), and they mention specifically the problem of : flare on outdoor work, in particular flare from light striking the : inside of the bellows. Kodak specifically points out that certain : films are superior and others are worse in dealing with this problem. : The kinds of films that are superior have curve shapes like Tri-X. The : kinds that are inferior for outdoor work are ones with curve shapes : like TMY. We can start with your fantasy that Kodak states that TMY isn't suitable for "outdoor" use. Any book that you have from the '60s is irrelevent to discussions of films like TMY that didn't exist at the time of printing. There is also your claim that the curve for TMY has a "sag" in it. The graph presented in the book clearly demonstrates that there is no "sag" in the curve. : Kodak used to make many types of sheet films, all with different curve : shapes for different applications. Since there is so little demand : today for sheet films, the range of materials has been reduced : considerably. Kodak's current marketing takes no account of these past : products, and suggests the few remaining films be used for a wider : range of applications than they did in the past. Make of that what you : will. It does not alter thae fact that the shape of the TMY curve is : less suited for outdoor work than that of Tri-X Pan (the 35mm/120 : format emulsion, not the sheet film emulsion, which has a curve shape : more like that of TMY): : http://wwwau.kodak.com/global/en/pro...009_0504ac.gif Once again nobody claimed that the curve for TMY is the same as tri-x. That includes both the sheet and roll film version of the film. Nice try at changing the subject though. : Now, if you THINK you know what you're talking about, you don't. I DO! -- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
fridge and heat problems | Edwin | In The Darkroom | 15 | July 7th 04 04:43 AM |