Pyro Staining B&W negatives vs. C-41 Monochromatic film

Also, I would like you to answer my other question about the toxicity
of pyro. Are you aware that pyro is less toxic than Dektol? Put up or
shut
up!

No, it is not 'less toxic than Dektol'.


Well, good. This is a perfect example when confronted with facts, you will
cannot change your mind. As I quoted previously from the Manufacturers
Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), Pyro has a Lethal Dose (LD) in 50% of the rats
it's fed to (altogether, LD-50) of 789mg per kg of body weight. Dektol has
a LD-50 in rats of 50 to 500mg per kg of body weight. You need less Dektol
to kill 50% of the rats than Pyro. Therefore, Dektol is more toxic by a
minimum of 1.25 times and a maximum of 15.78 times. These MSDS figures are
quickly available either from Kodak or the web, and therefore my figures are
easily provable. This is the reason you are always on the wrong end of
arguments. You won't listen to anyone other than yourself.

Now here's another goody. The ingestion of 409 spray cleaner is more likely
to kill or harm you than either of the above. That MSDS is also available
on the web. So stop the hysteria!

Good by goof ball. I've have had it with you. You're more frustrating than
a trying to catch a fly with chop sticks.

In article ,
John wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 03:09:57 GMT, Udie Lafing
wrote:

I think it was I who encouraged as many people as possible
to killfile you shortly after you came to the newsgroup
last year.....

Shame on me but unfortunately I haven't been keeping up on
this little Peyton Place. Exactly who are you ?

Why exactly do you need to know?


And I also recommended group-wide filtering but some people
seem to give his trolling enough merit that they actually read/reply
to his posts. Why they should do so knowing full well that it's
causing serious damage to this group is beyond me.

Defensive mechanics I guess, I started responding mainly
because I find foul language to be completely uncalled for and
especially offensive. BTW Google groups won't enforce by
refusing his posts,...so IT is up to the group. Best defense against a
troll as you and I have stated is to let him dry up.


I got curious and let him temporalily out of the old kill file
he probably going back very soon as 99.95% of his posts are uncouth
attempts to discredit others working knowledge.

Catch up with you Offline ;-)

In article ,
John wrote:

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 03:09:57 GMT, Udie Lafing
wrote:

I think it was I who encouraged as many people as possible
to killfile you shortly after you came to the newsgroup
last year.....

Shame on me but unfortunately I haven't been keeping up on
this little Peyton Place. Exactly who are you ?

Why exactly do you need to know?


And I also recommended group-wide filtering but some people
seem to give his trolling enough merit that they actually read/reply
to his posts. Why they should do so knowing full well that it's
causing serious damage to this group is beyond me.

Defensive mechanics I guess, I started responding mainly
because I find foul language to be completely uncalled for and
especially offensive. BTW Google groups won't enforce by
refusing his posts,...so IT is up to the group. Best defense against a
troll as you and I have stated is to let him dry up.


I got curious and let him temporalily out of the old kill file
he probably going back very soon as 99.95% of his posts are uncouth
attempts to discredit others working knowledge.

Catch up with you Offline ;-)

I agree completely.

In article ,
John wrote:


While I certainly applaud the sentiment that most seem to have
towards new members of the group, I do speak with a little voice of
experience. You see we once had a troll on rec.photo.technique.people
known ass Eric Scott. He combined with a couple other whackos to run
off some of the best contributors in the rec.photo. heiarchy. As long
as contributors feed these sick peoples egos, they will hang around.
Take away their food and they will move to greener pastures.

You are all better than this guy. Let him go. Unfortunately
this has to be unanimous. One or two feeders and he'll hang on for a
long, long time.

Frank you really just need to not include him in your
posting at all. Its ok if you want to defend your statements
and read his rebuttals.....you need to leave him personally out
though,...its what he's feeding off of.


In article ,
Frank Pittel wrote:

Udie Lafing wrote:
: Francis;

: Why waste your breath with him? Its like taking a couple huffs
: off a running cars muffler. Still the effort is noted
: and appreciated by some.

I agree that trying to reason with the troll that is scarpitti. The trick is
to
talk past scarpitti to the other readers. While I don't personally use pyro I
have friends that use pyro with berger film. The results he gets from it are
amazing! I've seen 11x14 prints made from 35mm negatives that were nearly
grainless with fantastic tonality. When I first saw some of his 11x14 prints
I thought
it was made from at least 6x4.5 and most likely 6x7 negatives. All done on VC
paper. Another example of the blathering from scarpitti falling on it's face
when faced with reality.

On the positive side scarpitti's blatherings are so off the wall and idiotic
that I doubt anyone but the most rank beginners take anything he says
seriously? and the little bit of credibility he has with those new to this
list is lost very quickly. In these cases the best that can be done for the
newbie is to point out the stupidity of scarpitti's advice and let everyone
see
his childish tantrums.

Frank you really just need to not include him in your
posting at all. Its ok if you want to defend your statements
and read his rebuttals.....you need to leave him personally out
though,...its what he's feeding off of.


In article ,
Frank Pittel wrote:

Udie Lafing wrote:
: Francis;

: Why waste your breath with him? Its like taking a couple huffs
: off a running cars muffler. Still the effort is noted
: and appreciated by some.

I agree that trying to reason with the troll that is scarpitti. The trick is
to
talk past scarpitti to the other readers. While I don't personally use pyro I
have friends that use pyro with berger film. The results he gets from it are
amazing! I've seen 11x14 prints made from 35mm negatives that were nearly
grainless with fantastic tonality. When I first saw some of his 11x14 prints
I thought
it was made from at least 6x4.5 and most likely 6x7 negatives. All done on VC
paper. Another example of the blathering from scarpitti falling on it's face
when faced with reality.

On the positive side scarpitti's blatherings are so off the wall and idiotic
that I doubt anyone but the most rank beginners take anything he says
seriously? and the little bit of credibility he has with those new to this
list is lost very quickly. In these cases the best that can be done for the
newbie is to point out the stupidity of scarpitti's advice and let everyone
see
his childish tantrums.

Frank you really just need to not include him in your
posting at all. Its ok if you want to defend your statements
and read his rebuttals.....you need to leave him personally out
though,...its what he's feeding off of.


In article ,
Frank Pittel wrote:

Udie Lafing wrote:
: Francis;

: Why waste your breath with him? Its like taking a couple huffs
: off a running cars muffler. Still the effort is noted
: and appreciated by some.

I agree that trying to reason with the troll that is scarpitti. The trick is
to
talk past scarpitti to the other readers. While I don't personally use pyro I
have friends that use pyro with berger film. The results he gets from it are
amazing! I've seen 11x14 prints made from 35mm negatives that were nearly
grainless with fantastic tonality. When I first saw some of his 11x14 prints
I thought
it was made from at least 6x4.5 and most likely 6x7 negatives. All done on VC
paper. Another example of the blathering from scarpitti falling on it's face
when faced with reality.

On the positive side scarpitti's blatherings are so off the wall and idiotic
that I doubt anyone but the most rank beginners take anything he says
seriously? and the little bit of credibility he has with those new to this
list is lost very quickly. In these cases the best that can be done for the
newbie is to point out the stupidity of scarpitti's advice and let everyone
see
his childish tantrums.

Jim Phelps wrote:
By what? Rodinal has a quality and characterist of it's own. D-76 or
Microdol haven't replaced it for me...

The local Kamera Klub Koffee Klatch does not like Rodinal; they place
great importance on fine grain and extreme sharpness. The member who
makes tack sharp 20x24" prints from 35mm is held in high esteem; another
member who makes 16x20" prints from Minox negs is regarded as a demi-god.

Like Mike Scarpitti, members of the Kamera Klub Koffee Klatch almost never
use the word "TONALITY".

Jim Phelps wrote:
By what? Rodinal has a quality and characterist of it's own. D-76 or
Microdol haven't replaced it for me...

The local Kamera Klub Koffee Klatch does not like Rodinal; they place
great importance on fine grain and extreme sharpness. The member who
makes tack sharp 20x24" prints from 35mm is held in high esteem; another
member who makes 16x20" prints from Minox negs is regarded as a demi-god.

Like Mike Scarpitti, members of the Kamera Klub Koffee Klatch almost never
use the word "TONALITY".

"Jim Phelps" wrote in message ...
Also, I would like you to answer my other question about the toxicity
of pyro. Are you aware that pyro is less toxic than Dektol? Put up or
shut
up!

No, it is not 'less toxic than Dektol'.


Well, good. This is a perfect example when confronted with facts, you will
cannot change your mind. As I quoted previously from the Manufacturers
Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), Pyro has a Lethal Dose (LD) in 50% of the rats
it's fed to (altogether, LD-50) of 789mg per kg of body weight. Dektol has
a LD-50 in rats of 50 to 500mg per kg of body weight. You need less Dektol
to kill 50% of the rats than Pyro. Therefore, Dektol is more toxic by a
minimum of 1.25 times and a maximum of 15.78 times. These MSDS figures are
quickly available either from Kodak or the web, and therefore my figures are
easily provable. This is the reason you are always on the wrong end of
arguments. You won't listen to anyone other than yourself.

Now here's another goody. The ingestion of 409 spray cleaner is more likely
to kill or harm you than either of the above. That MSDS is also available
on the web. So stop the hysteria!

Good by goof ball. I've have had it with you. You're more frustrating than
a trying to catch a fly with chop sticks.


The route of ingestion is ignored by you. Breathing Dektol dust is far
less hazardous than breathing pyro dust. Ditto with the solution. This
is clearly explained he

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/De...evelopers.html

"Safety

Most of the developing agents are moderately to extremely toxic and
should never be ingested or breathed. Many are toxic by absorption
through the skin and can cause skin irritation and allergic reactions.
Most developing agents are crystalline in nature, but often form dust,
particularly when they become caked up and have to be scraped from
their containers. It cannot be emphasized enough that dust from
developing agents should not be breathed. Darkroom workers should make
every effort to minimize the production of dust, and should aways wear
a NIOSH-approved mask for hazardous dust when mixing developers.

Pyrogallol, pyrocatechin, amidol, and paraphenylene diamine are highly
toxic and readily absorbed through the skin--a few drops now and then
will not be dangerous, but effects are often cumulative, so gloves and
eye protection should be worn when working with solutions of these
agents. Stock solutions of pyrogallol should be mixed under a chemical
vent hood or out-of-doors to prevent the concentration of toxic fumes
in the darkroom. Amidol should never be mixed into a solution much
above 80 degrees Fahrenheit for the same reason.

Concentrated acids and caustic alkalis should be handled with the
greatest care. Though such chemicals are rarely used in the modern
darkroom, they are not unknown--acid proof gloves are recommended.
Water should not be added to concentrated acids because they will boil
and splatter--always add the acid to the water. Similarly, great care
should be taken when adding caustic alkalis to water--do not add them
to hot water. Strong acids and bases should never be combined except
under expert supervision.

In general, gloves and eye-protection should be worn when handling
caustic or toxic chemicals, and a NIOSH-approved face mask should be
employed when mixing any chemical that might form dust."

For further information on chemical safety, see Photographic
Processing Hazards and Chemical and Other Safety Information. There
are also some excellent books available, including OvereXposure and
Health Hazards for Photographers