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 |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
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 ;-) |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
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 ;-) |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
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". |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
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". |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What densities at which zones? | ~BitPump | Large Format Photography Equipment | 24 | August 13th 04 04:15 AM |
Kodak on Variable Film Development: NO! | Michael Scarpitti | In The Darkroom | 276 | August 12th 04 10:42 PM |
Is it Copal or copal? Then what is it? | Nick Zentena | Large Format Photography Equipment | 14 | July 27th 04 03:31 AM |
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 94 | June 23rd 04 05:17 AM |
The first film of the Digital Revolution is here.... | Todd Bailey | Film & Labs | 0 | May 27th 04 08:12 AM |