Light source for Pyro negs

"PATRICK GAINER" wrote in message
...
Uranium Committee wrote:

"Jim Phelps" wrote in message
...


"Uranium Committee" wrote in
message
e.com...


The 'benefit' of a stained negative is the stain, which
takes the
place of silver density for papers that are sensitive
only to blue.
The stain is yellowish-green, and since these stains
block blue light,
they are seen as extra density by blue-sensitive paper.
Variable
contrast paper DOES see 'green', and so the stain DOES
NOT act as
density for VC papers.

Use and GRADED paper to get the 'benefits' of pyro. The
light source
does not matter so much. DO NOT use VC paper, because it
defeats the
whole purpose of pyro.



This information is completely wrong.



No, it's correct!

FACT: the stain is yellowish-green

FACT: the stain TRANSMITS yellowish-green and STOPS blue
light

FACT: graded paper is insensitive to green or yellow light

FACT: VC paper is sensitive to green light

CONCLUSION: the stain ADDS density as far as graded paper
is
concerned, and DOES NOT add density as far as VC paper is
concerned.

In addition, the green light that the stain allows through
softens the
contrast in the most-heavily-exposed areas, precisely the
opposite
effect that occurs when graded paper is used. Attempting
to use VC
filtration to raise the contrast simply ignores the stain
again, and
you end up fighting against the stain.


It is quite obvious that you have not tried it, and that
you have not
reasoned out the answer that you did not try. The yellow
stain is a
variable density stain. You can bleach out the silver
image and leave a
yellow IMAGE, not a filter layer. This yellow image can be
printed on VC
paper by use of sufficient blue filtering. I have done it,
and several
years ago demonstrated it in an article in Photo
Techniques titled "More
Pyrotechnics" . Certainly, the yellow image is of quite
low contrast
when printed on unfiltered VC paper, but it is there. The
yellow part of
an unbleached pyro negative DOES increase the contrast on
VC paper,
though not as much as on graded paper. If you do the
following
experiment, you will see the fallacy in your reasoning.
Develop any
negative in any non-staining developer to a lower than
normal contrast
index. Make a straight print without filtration on VC
paper. Now bleach
the negative in a rehalogenating solution such as is used
in sepia
toning, and redevelop it in a pyro staining developer.
Make a straight
print from this negative without filtration. Now make
another print
using magenta filtration or a #3 or #4 printing filter.
Report to us the
results if you dare.

Its possible to bleach out either the stain or the
silver image. The stain can be removed by using a
permanganate type bleach.
The stain image, as pointed out Patrick, acts as a
proportional intensifier. Its density in relation to the
silver density varies with the type of developer and the
type of film. The ratio of densities can also be measured by
making separate readings though the red and blue status
filters of a color densitometer. The red filter will measure
the silver image density along, the blue will measure both.
The important thing is that there is no change in film
characteristic, i.e., the _shape_ of the exposure vs:
density curve from Pyro, only a change in its _effective_
overall slope. You could also prove this by printing on
panchromatic paper trough red and blue filters.
In the case of variable contrast paper it is possible that
the yellow stain image causes a reduction of contrast as the
density increases. I have never seen actual densitometric
measurements of this so I can't say whether it is a reall or
only a claimed effect.
To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

"PATRICK GAINER" wrote in message
...
Uranium Committee wrote:

"Jim Phelps" wrote in message
...


"Uranium Committee" wrote in
message
e.com...


The 'benefit' of a stained negative is the stain, which
takes the
place of silver density for papers that are sensitive
only to blue.
The stain is yellowish-green, and since these stains
block blue light,
they are seen as extra density by blue-sensitive paper.
Variable
contrast paper DOES see 'green', and so the stain DOES
NOT act as
density for VC papers.

Use and GRADED paper to get the 'benefits' of pyro. The
light source
does not matter so much. DO NOT use VC paper, because it
defeats the
whole purpose of pyro.



This information is completely wrong.



No, it's correct!

FACT: the stain is yellowish-green

FACT: the stain TRANSMITS yellowish-green and STOPS blue
light

FACT: graded paper is insensitive to green or yellow light

FACT: VC paper is sensitive to green light

CONCLUSION: the stain ADDS density as far as graded paper
is
concerned, and DOES NOT add density as far as VC paper is
concerned.

In addition, the green light that the stain allows through
softens the
contrast in the most-heavily-exposed areas, precisely the
opposite
effect that occurs when graded paper is used. Attempting
to use VC
filtration to raise the contrast simply ignores the stain
again, and
you end up fighting against the stain.


It is quite obvious that you have not tried it, and that
you have not
reasoned out the answer that you did not try. The yellow
stain is a
variable density stain. You can bleach out the silver
image and leave a
yellow IMAGE, not a filter layer. This yellow image can be
printed on VC
paper by use of sufficient blue filtering. I have done it,
and several
years ago demonstrated it in an article in Photo
Techniques titled "More
Pyrotechnics" . Certainly, the yellow image is of quite
low contrast
when printed on unfiltered VC paper, but it is there. The
yellow part of
an unbleached pyro negative DOES increase the contrast on
VC paper,
though not as much as on graded paper. If you do the
following
experiment, you will see the fallacy in your reasoning.
Develop any
negative in any non-staining developer to a lower than
normal contrast
index. Make a straight print without filtration on VC
paper. Now bleach
the negative in a rehalogenating solution such as is used
in sepia
toning, and redevelop it in a pyro staining developer.
Make a straight
print from this negative without filtration. Now make
another print
using magenta filtration or a #3 or #4 printing filter.
Report to us the
results if you dare.

Its possible to bleach out either the stain or the
silver image. The stain can be removed by using a
permanganate type bleach.
The stain image, as pointed out Patrick, acts as a
proportional intensifier. Its density in relation to the
silver density varies with the type of developer and the
type of film. The ratio of densities can also be measured by
making separate readings though the red and blue status
filters of a color densitometer. The red filter will measure
the silver image density along, the blue will measure both.
The important thing is that there is no change in film
characteristic, i.e., the _shape_ of the exposure vs:
density curve from Pyro, only a change in its _effective_
overall slope. You could also prove this by printing on
panchromatic paper trough red and blue filters.
In the case of variable contrast paper it is possible that
the yellow stain image causes a reduction of contrast as the
density increases. I have never seen actual densitometric
measurements of this so I can't say whether it is a reall or
only a claimed effect.
To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.


--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.

Well I am sure that could be among the unwashed masses.

I've been using Pyro developers since the early 1990's maybe mid 1980's
well before Gordon Hutchings published his book. There are also
other photographers who have a much longer history than myself
Michael A Smith, Steve Simmons probably a whole slue of others.

I probably would have given up on Pyro had Gordon not devised
the PMK formula, and had others not made other improvements
in the Formula aka (Rollo PMK). The fade could be a result of f a
reinsurgance of interest in the roots of photo, people's interest
in Alt process as Pyro stained negatives have merits towards those
applications.

I personally became interested in Albumen printing and alt process
as a result of my college history of photo course, I read the Keepers
of Light and was some what intrigued by some of the old process.

Around 1988 I did some basic experiments in creating salted prints
paper negatives, it was a little before you heard so much of people doing such
things. Its the fun side of photography so I doubt it will readily die out.
--
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

In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.

Well I am sure that could be among the unwashed masses.

I've been using Pyro developers since the early 1990's maybe mid 1980's
well before Gordon Hutchings published his book. There are also
other photographers who have a much longer history than myself
Michael A Smith, Steve Simmons probably a whole slue of others.

I probably would have given up on Pyro had Gordon not devised
the PMK formula, and had others not made other improvements
in the Formula aka (Rollo PMK). The fade could be a result of f a
reinsurgance of interest in the roots of photo, people's interest
in Alt process as Pyro stained negatives have merits towards those
applications.

I personally became interested in Albumen printing and alt process
as a result of my college history of photo course, I read the Keepers
of Light and was some what intrigued by some of the old process.

Around 1988 I did some basic experiments in creating salted prints
paper negatives, it was a little before you heard so much of people doing such
things. Its the fun side of photography so I doubt it will readily die out.
--
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

Gregory W Blank wrote in message news:8Vkpd.10455$1B2.683@trnddc02...
In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.

Well I am sure that could be among the unwashed masses.

I've been using Pyro developers since the early 1990's maybe mid 1980's
well before Gordon Hutchings published his book. There are also
other photographers who have a much longer history than myself
Michael A Smith, Steve Simmons probably a whole slue of others.

I probably would have given up on Pyro had Gordon not devised
the PMK formula, and had others not made other improvements
in the Formula aka (Rollo PMK). The fade could be a result of f a
reinsurgance of interest in the roots of photo, people's interest
in Alt process as Pyro stained negatives have merits towards those
applications.

I personally became interested in Albumen printing and alt process
as a result of my college history of photo course, I read the Keepers
of Light and was some what intrigued by some of the old process.

Around 1988 I did some basic experiments in creating salted prints
paper negatives, it was a little before you heard so much of people doing such
things. Its the fun side of photography so I doubt it will readily die out.


Richard has often stated that pyro is probably a fad, or people are
getting good effects because of an increased amount of attention paid.
All I can say is
after many years of regular developers, resulting in highly diluted
developers to control landscape contrast, I tried pyro (cat) and was finally
happy with the look of things. I could maintain alot of shadow detail,
yet still have a nice atmospheric sky, even though the exposures
usually favor the shadow. My skies would often white out with regular
developers. Less dev. times and the scene goes flat and looks like
a compensating developer or preflash was used.

The powerful Ansel Adams look often settles for darker shadows, as the
image made is more theatrical than I'm making. Weston too, has than
drama. I'm more interested in how the eye sees the contrast, and
really have to fight for longer tones. Although they both have many
shots where it all comes together, I tend to think thats due to lighting
conditions more than anything else.


With my dev. time using pyrocat, I have found where I can get a long
tonal range while still maintaining a perfect contrast. Never flat
looking and IMO more natural looking than regular developers. If I
want the punchier graphic look, I stick with D-76, but pyrocat
definitly yeilds a unique and natural looking image. More like what
the eye sees. 1:100 Rodinal, highly diluted HC-110, etc, will deaden
into flatness if I reduce the development enough to hold the high
areas the way the pyro does. I would say that because I give a full
shadow exposure, even in contrasty light, my highs get way up there,
so the stain allows good printability but is still a pleasing white.
Detail without drabness.

Ken Smith

Gregory W Blank wrote in message news:8Vkpd.10455$1B2.683@trnddc02...
In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.

Well I am sure that could be among the unwashed masses.

I've been using Pyro developers since the early 1990's maybe mid 1980's
well before Gordon Hutchings published his book. There are also
other photographers who have a much longer history than myself
Michael A Smith, Steve Simmons probably a whole slue of others.

I probably would have given up on Pyro had Gordon not devised
the PMK formula, and had others not made other improvements
in the Formula aka (Rollo PMK). The fade could be a result of f a
reinsurgance of interest in the roots of photo, people's interest
in Alt process as Pyro stained negatives have merits towards those
applications.

I personally became interested in Albumen printing and alt process
as a result of my college history of photo course, I read the Keepers
of Light and was some what intrigued by some of the old process.

Around 1988 I did some basic experiments in creating salted prints
paper negatives, it was a little before you heard so much of people doing such
things. Its the fun side of photography so I doubt it will readily die out.


Richard has often stated that pyro is probably a fad, or people are
getting good effects because of an increased amount of attention paid.
All I can say is
after many years of regular developers, resulting in highly diluted
developers to control landscape contrast, I tried pyro (cat) and was finally
happy with the look of things. I could maintain alot of shadow detail,
yet still have a nice atmospheric sky, even though the exposures
usually favor the shadow. My skies would often white out with regular
developers. Less dev. times and the scene goes flat and looks like
a compensating developer or preflash was used.

The powerful Ansel Adams look often settles for darker shadows, as the
image made is more theatrical than I'm making. Weston too, has than
drama. I'm more interested in how the eye sees the contrast, and
really have to fight for longer tones. Although they both have many
shots where it all comes together, I tend to think thats due to lighting
conditions more than anything else.


With my dev. time using pyrocat, I have found where I can get a long
tonal range while still maintaining a perfect contrast. Never flat
looking and IMO more natural looking than regular developers. If I
want the punchier graphic look, I stick with D-76, but pyrocat
definitly yeilds a unique and natural looking image. More like what
the eye sees. 1:100 Rodinal, highly diluted HC-110, etc, will deaden
into flatness if I reduce the development enough to hold the high
areas the way the pyro does. I would say that because I give a full
shadow exposure, even in contrasty light, my highs get way up there,
so the stain allows good printability but is still a pleasing white.
Detail without drabness.

Ken Smith

Gregory W Blank wrote in message news:8Vkpd.10455$1B2.683@trnddc02...
In article ,
"Richard Knoppow" wrote:

To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.

Well I am sure that could be among the unwashed masses.

I've been using Pyro developers since the early 1990's maybe mid 1980's
well before Gordon Hutchings published his book. There are also
other photographers who have a much longer history than myself
Michael A Smith, Steve Simmons probably a whole slue of others.

I probably would have given up on Pyro had Gordon not devised
the PMK formula, and had others not made other improvements
in the Formula aka (Rollo PMK). The fade could be a result of f a
reinsurgance of interest in the roots of photo, people's interest
in Alt process as Pyro stained negatives have merits towards those
applications.

I personally became interested in Albumen printing and alt process
as a result of my college history of photo course, I read the Keepers
of Light and was some what intrigued by some of the old process.

Around 1988 I did some basic experiments in creating salted prints
paper negatives, it was a little before you heard so much of people doing such
things. Its the fun side of photography so I doubt it will readily die out.


Richard has often stated that pyro is probably a fad, or people are
getting good effects because of an increased amount of attention paid.
All I can say is
after many years of regular developers, resulting in highly diluted
developers to control landscape contrast, I tried pyro (cat) and was finally
happy with the look of things. I could maintain alot of shadow detail,
yet still have a nice atmospheric sky, even though the exposures
usually favor the shadow. My skies would often white out with regular
developers. Less dev. times and the scene goes flat and looks like
a compensating developer or preflash was used.

The powerful Ansel Adams look often settles for darker shadows, as the
image made is more theatrical than I'm making. Weston too, has than
drama. I'm more interested in how the eye sees the contrast, and
really have to fight for longer tones. Although they both have many
shots where it all comes together, I tend to think thats due to lighting
conditions more than anything else.


With my dev. time using pyrocat, I have found where I can get a long
tonal range while still maintaining a perfect contrast. Never flat
looking and IMO more natural looking than regular developers. If I
want the punchier graphic look, I stick with D-76, but pyrocat
definitly yeilds a unique and natural looking image. More like what
the eye sees. 1:100 Rodinal, highly diluted HC-110, etc, will deaden
into flatness if I reduce the development enough to hold the high
areas the way the pyro does. I would say that because I give a full
shadow exposure, even in contrasty light, my highs get way up there,
so the stain allows good printability but is still a pleasing white.
Detail without drabness.

Ken Smith

Richard Knoppow wrote:

"PATRICK GAINER" wrote in message
...


Uranium Committee wrote:



"Jim Phelps" wrote in message
...




"Uranium Committee" wrote in
message
le.com...




The 'benefit' of a stained negative is the stain, which
takes the
place of silver density for papers that are sensitive
only to blue.
The stain is yellowish-green, and since these stains
block blue light,
they are seen as extra density by blue-sensitive paper.
Variable
contrast paper DOES see 'green', and so the stain DOES
NOT act as
density for VC papers.

Use and GRADED paper to get the 'benefits' of pyro. The
light source
does not matter so much. DO NOT use VC paper, because it
defeats the
whole purpose of pyro.





This information is completely wrong.




No, it's correct!

FACT: the stain is yellowish-green

FACT: the stain TRANSMITS yellowish-green and STOPS blue
light

FACT: graded paper is insensitive to green or yellow light

FACT: VC paper is sensitive to green light

CONCLUSION: the stain ADDS density as far as graded paper
is
concerned, and DOES NOT add density as far as VC paper is
concerned.

In addition, the green light that the stain allows through
softens the
contrast in the most-heavily-exposed areas, precisely the
opposite
effect that occurs when graded paper is used. Attempting
to use VC
filtration to raise the contrast simply ignores the stain
again, and
you end up fighting against the stain.




It is quite obvious that you have not tried it, and that
you have not
reasoned out the answer that you did not try. The yellow
stain is a
variable density stain. You can bleach out the silver
image and leave a
yellow IMAGE, not a filter layer. This yellow image can be
printed on VC
paper by use of sufficient blue filtering. I have done it,
and several
years ago demonstrated it in an article in Photo
Techniques titled "More
Pyrotechnics" . Certainly, the yellow image is of quite
low contrast
when printed on unfiltered VC paper, but it is there. The
yellow part of
an unbleached pyro negative DOES increase the contrast on
VC paper,
though not as much as on graded paper. If you do the
following
experiment, you will see the fallacy in your reasoning.
Develop any
negative in any non-staining developer to a lower than
normal contrast
index. Make a straight print without filtration on VC
paper. Now bleach
the negative in a rehalogenating solution such as is used
in sepia
toning, and redevelop it in a pyro staining developer.
Make a straight
print from this negative without filtration. Now make
another print
using magenta filtration or a #3 or #4 printing filter.
Report to us the
results if you dare.



Its possible to bleach out either the stain or the
silver image. The stain can be removed by using a
permanganate type bleach.
The stain image, as pointed out Patrick, acts as a
proportional intensifier. Its density in relation to the
silver density varies with the type of developer and the
type of film. The ratio of densities can also be measured by
making separate readings though the red and blue status
filters of a color densitometer. The red filter will measure
the silver image density along, the blue will measure both.
The important thing is that there is no change in film
characteristic, i.e., the _shape_ of the exposure vs:
density curve from Pyro, only a change in its _effective_
overall slope. You could also prove this by printing on
panchromatic paper trough red and blue filters.
In the case of variable contrast paper it is possible that
the yellow stain image causes a reduction of contrast as the
density increases. I have never seen actual densitometric
measurements of this so I can't say whether it is a reall or
only a claimed effect.
To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.




Pyro does have advantages for those who would like to be able to use the
same negative for either printing-out processes that require high
contrast but are only blue sensitive or printing with VC paper. There
are also advantages claimed for wide range scenes that include clouds.

I have been privileged to have a compilation of the papers of Hurter &
Driffield who considered and experimented with inorganic developer and
organic pyrogallol. They never made much of the staining by pyro, using
enough sulfite to pretty well eliminate the stain.

My point, with which I think you agree, is that the effect of the pyro
stain when properly done is to increase the contrast even with VC paper,
though not as much as with graded paper, and to present some experiments
to demonstrate it. I do not use a lot of staining developer, but do
occasionally use it as an intensifier to increase contrast of
underveveloped negatives. I guarantee it works, and the process may be
repeated. Each repetition restore the original silver density and adds
to it a proportional stain.

Richard Knoppow wrote:

"PATRICK GAINER" wrote in message
...


Uranium Committee wrote:



"Jim Phelps" wrote in message
...




"Uranium Committee" wrote in
message
le.com...




The 'benefit' of a stained negative is the stain, which
takes the
place of silver density for papers that are sensitive
only to blue.
The stain is yellowish-green, and since these stains
block blue light,
they are seen as extra density by blue-sensitive paper.
Variable
contrast paper DOES see 'green', and so the stain DOES
NOT act as
density for VC papers.

Use and GRADED paper to get the 'benefits' of pyro. The
light source
does not matter so much. DO NOT use VC paper, because it
defeats the
whole purpose of pyro.





This information is completely wrong.




No, it's correct!

FACT: the stain is yellowish-green

FACT: the stain TRANSMITS yellowish-green and STOPS blue
light

FACT: graded paper is insensitive to green or yellow light

FACT: VC paper is sensitive to green light

CONCLUSION: the stain ADDS density as far as graded paper
is
concerned, and DOES NOT add density as far as VC paper is
concerned.

In addition, the green light that the stain allows through
softens the
contrast in the most-heavily-exposed areas, precisely the
opposite
effect that occurs when graded paper is used. Attempting
to use VC
filtration to raise the contrast simply ignores the stain
again, and
you end up fighting against the stain.




It is quite obvious that you have not tried it, and that
you have not
reasoned out the answer that you did not try. The yellow
stain is a
variable density stain. You can bleach out the silver
image and leave a
yellow IMAGE, not a filter layer. This yellow image can be
printed on VC
paper by use of sufficient blue filtering. I have done it,
and several
years ago demonstrated it in an article in Photo
Techniques titled "More
Pyrotechnics" . Certainly, the yellow image is of quite
low contrast
when printed on unfiltered VC paper, but it is there. The
yellow part of
an unbleached pyro negative DOES increase the contrast on
VC paper,
though not as much as on graded paper. If you do the
following
experiment, you will see the fallacy in your reasoning.
Develop any
negative in any non-staining developer to a lower than
normal contrast
index. Make a straight print without filtration on VC
paper. Now bleach
the negative in a rehalogenating solution such as is used
in sepia
toning, and redevelop it in a pyro staining developer.
Make a straight
print from this negative without filtration. Now make
another print
using magenta filtration or a #3 or #4 printing filter.
Report to us the
results if you dare.



Its possible to bleach out either the stain or the
silver image. The stain can be removed by using a
permanganate type bleach.
The stain image, as pointed out Patrick, acts as a
proportional intensifier. Its density in relation to the
silver density varies with the type of developer and the
type of film. The ratio of densities can also be measured by
making separate readings though the red and blue status
filters of a color densitometer. The red filter will measure
the silver image density along, the blue will measure both.
The important thing is that there is no change in film
characteristic, i.e., the _shape_ of the exposure vs:
density curve from Pyro, only a change in its _effective_
overall slope. You could also prove this by printing on
panchromatic paper trough red and blue filters.
In the case of variable contrast paper it is possible that
the yellow stain image causes a reduction of contrast as the
density increases. I have never seen actual densitometric
measurements of this so I can't say whether it is a reall or
only a claimed effect.
To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.




Pyro does have advantages for those who would like to be able to use the
same negative for either printing-out processes that require high
contrast but are only blue sensitive or printing with VC paper. There
are also advantages claimed for wide range scenes that include clouds.

I have been privileged to have a compilation of the papers of Hurter &
Driffield who considered and experimented with inorganic developer and
organic pyrogallol. They never made much of the staining by pyro, using
enough sulfite to pretty well eliminate the stain.

My point, with which I think you agree, is that the effect of the pyro
stain when properly done is to increase the contrast even with VC paper,
though not as much as with graded paper, and to present some experiments
to demonstrate it. I do not use a lot of staining developer, but do
occasionally use it as an intensifier to increase contrast of
underveveloped negatives. I guarantee it works, and the process may be
repeated. Each repetition restore the original silver density and adds
to it a proportional stain.

Richard Knoppow wrote:
big snip
To be blunt I think Pyro is something of a fad. Pyro was
the most used developer into the early 20th century but fell
out of use when other, and better, developers became
available.


True, but that was before PMK, which turned pyrogallol based developers into a
reliable method of development. Our gratitude to Patrick Gainer for that.


Francis A. Miniter