wayne__

Bill,

 

the ICP is different in several ways. the ICP process time and temperature are adjustable, making it usable for more than just Ilfochrome (RA-4 and B&W). It has the dryer module, optional. It has the superior step plates of the later versions of the CAP-40. Those ar the major differences, they are pretty similar otherwise. Most parts are interchangeable with the CAP's

 

 

Geoffrey,

 

If you dont find anything by December email me at keewatin at warpmail dot net. I have what you are looking for but I dont particularly want to part with it if I dont have to. I might need the money bad enough in December to let it go, but dont get your hopes up because I dont part with anything photographic unless I really have to. As I recall needs a little work, i havent used it in 2 years

No scientific studies have been done on the safety of home *septic* disposal, so one proceeds at their own risk.

 

In regards to John Sexton, a friend and I both smoked 2 packs a day for 25 years and we're still alive, therefore its safe

Brian, you insist on referring to the December "poll" which was clearly not a poll! It was not a poll! Q-Tuan took the danged poll! Get over it.

 

Incidentally, I noticed that many of the Greenspun Lusenet forums are still up and running and active as we speak, on the Greenspun server. So why the big rush to get us here?

Just been informed that I bought the last case of Rodinol they have & may be the last

they can get. Seems Agfa called & told them

 

=====================

 

Who are "they" and "them"?

check Anchell Darkroom Cookbook. There are conversion tables in the back.

------------

 

This came up a a little while ago. the table pretends to be a Universal converter, but it is really only good for sodium sulfite. But there is no conversion from dessicated to anhydrous

If you know any lichenologists, they'll have some PD laying around. Its used in lichen identification

Its the same thing, for all practical purposes.

Nope I know nothing about the process, just disjointed bits and pieces I've picked up from talking to people. PF is understandably not giving out recipes, but I'm sure a diligent person could dig one out of the literature or find a (old retired Kodak) chemist somewhere. But it is a nasty, unpleasant chemical to make and I think that deters most would-be's. (or maybe PF made that up to discourage it? I doubt it tho)

 

I only shoot 8x10 in B&W so Rodinal's grain isnt a problem for me. ;-)

The person I spoke with told me..

 

--------

 

Whoa, hold 'er there. Thats the same person who is selling it to you! ;-) Did she also tell you how nasty it is to make? Its toxicity isnt over or underrated IMO. Its safe if you are careful and potentially dangerous if you arent.

 

Ryuji, if you move you'll still have to order from PF, unless you move overseas. The guy from Artcraft (is his name Art Craft? anyway..) was hoping to start making it but I dont think he ever did. Its a real PIA, from what I've heard. And its nasty to make, much nastier than it is to use.

 

I think glycin fell out of favor because cheaper alternatives were developed, although one could easily argue they displaced it rather than replaced it

I have some powder thats been sitting here for about a year, but I have no plans to use it soon. I guess I'll find out how it keeps when I get around to using more of it. I also have some stock print developer that I mixed a year ago, that I'm going to try before dumping it. Now that just might still be good.

 

Oh BTW, Fotochem in Canada USED to carry glycin, but I dont think they do anymore. they got it from-you guessed it.

I do dat too. In fact I do all of the above, loading with the darkslide only open slightly farther than the tracks, the finger and the nail things. Mido's are a whole nother animal tho ;-)

I keep the thumb and idex of fingers of my left hand right on the beginning of the film track so I can feel the film slide right under. I really have to stretch (and use my middle finger) for 8x10's but it works every time

oh and Duluth is a kinda big place. Art Institute? Tweed Museum? Electric Fetus?

Is it Blacklock or is it Photoshop? Inquiring minds want to know

Eugene, I dont think James did anything to be terribly upset about. One of the features of photo.net is the ability to upload pictures, and James used it. Thats all. I think we're all a bit cranky. I know I am

The shutter is definitely worth having and cleaning even if the lens bites (and I'm not saying it does). If you are a DIY'er, check the Google Usenet archives for 2 recent posts (3-4 weeks) by Richard Knoppow in rec.photo.equipment.large-format which details what you need and how to do it. Its supposedly not hard. You will need a shutter tester which is about $80 new, but then you'll be set for life and can test all your shutters. SK GRimes does fine work and will charge $60-80 I think, based on a recent quote for one of mine

 

I'm very fond of Wolly shutters. I have 3 No. 4's, one Betax and (my favorites) two Alphax. I like the Alphax better because they have 1 second whereas the most Betax's only go to 1/2 sec. I have an Apo-Nikkor 480 in one of them, the other is waiting to meet its lensmate, the sticky old Betax has an old and sucky Turner-Reich 12/19/25 convertible.

 

You can put just about any lens in that #5. Cleaned up and working its probably worth $200, although Wolly's might not sell as fast as say an Ilex. But one that size wont hang aroound too long. If you dont like the Gundlach I'd shop around for a nice big process lens, a front mount by SK is only about $80 I think. You might even be able to have him adapt it so you can interchange different front-mounted process lenses on it, since that shutter is big enuff for anything you're likely to use.

well, if Ilford makes it perhaps there's an Arista equivalent but that would actually be the same thing, if it exists. Whats wrong with Ilford's?

I presume this is the stuff the Formulary sent me a small sample of last year, but I didnt find it to be that non-odorous. But the sample they sent was so ridiculously small as to be nearly useless

Sorry 'bout the test. Earlier today I tried to post numerous times and kept getting an invalid html tag message, or some other crap I dont comprehend and was not guilty of.

 

Anyway. You used to (or I used to) be able to get a very small selection of LF film at Photo Service Center on Railroad (I think its RR, havent lived there a few years). But I usually drove to Warshal's in Seattle.

 

Ah, Bellingham. It was such a beautiful place to be before 50,000 new Bellinghamsters moved in. I hear 50,000 more are expected soon! People who dont know think its good now, but they dont know what they missed. I do, and I miss it. But its gone forever. Just last fall I was stuck in traffic there for 1/2 hour! Unheard of just a few years earlier. This is rampant growth, "progress" at its finest. Sorry, but I never miss a chance to bitch about what happened to my former home.

test

The earlier July 2000 vote is irrelevant

 

 

---------

 

 

I dont think it was irrelevant at all. Q-Tuan states ( in his recent personal statement, referring to the thread where you tallied "the votes", as you call them) (!) " This was not meant to be a vote, since one had been conducted a year and half ago..."

 

There might have been another vote taken by Tuan back then (theres a broken link in one of those threads, which seems to point to a poll), in addition to the July 2000 "vote" I referred to. Tuan did not initiate that July thread, but whichever one we refer to, except the one last December which was not intended to be a vote, the results were the same.

 

 

Anyway I dont want to keep flogging this dog forever, I just think the vote issue was settled long ago, and if someone can override that its got to be Q-Tuan. I also will reiterate that if we are going to go elsewhere, we need to do it very quickly before the "community" we want to preserve disintegrates.

My apologies to Eric for the sarcastic tone of my post, which isnt going to help things any, and for misrepresenting his earlier "vote" which was a "yes" to come here albeit after the first vote was already taken the year prior.

Eric, thanks for your concern about this forum. We had the vote before we came here. Sorry you missed it. The answer was no.

 

Eric, do we know you from another name at our old home? You dont show up in the archives before we moved here. It seems like you are just trying to cause trouble. Oh wait, I just found you. You "voted" to move here as Eric XX@xx.com in December 2001. I presume thats you anyway, hard to tell with that address.

 

To Brian re "the vote". Look at the "future of this forum" thread from 2000. Thats what I was referring to. The vast majority of respondents said no to photo.net, around 17 to 5 or 6 depending on how you count some less than clear replies. I found it interesting that suddenly more people (including Ericxx) "voted" for photo.net in the more recent thread you looked at, but I didnt even "vote" at that time because I didnt see Tuan's message as a call for votes. The vote had been done a year before that. He even referred to the photo.net issues, referring to the thread where a vote HAD been asked for, the results given above! As far as I was concerned, the photo.net option had already been voted down as a "preferred" option, though most agreed it was better than no forum at all. Here we are, with the less preferred option, certainly better than none at all, with some fine folks working hard to get the preferred option up and running.

In my opinion, we already voted to NOT move to photo.net, unless there was no choice, so I dont understand any allusions above to "if we decide to leave". The fact that we suddenly find ourselves here does nothing to change that IMO. There were other choices that were being worked on but not enough time to implement them it seems. If I could have done anything more, I would (having no web skills other than shooting off my mouth). Its unfortunate that another site wasnt found before the move, but oh well. The effort was and is being made. I commend Josh and Bjorn and the others working on an alternate site, and hope its done soon! I dont see any reason to discuss whether or not we go there, thats all been done AFAIC. My only question is "whats the URL and when will it open"? Anyone can go back and tally the "votes" in pertinent threads over the past 1.5 years, but except for a few vocal proponents of photo.net I thought it was clearly and heavily in favor or remaining independant if a home could be found. After reading this thread it sounds like an even better idea ;-)

If we stay here for any length of time and then decide we must leave, it will be too late. I think if we want a permanent home elsewhere (and I vote for that option, no offense to p-net but being seperate is better IMO) we have to find it ASAP, otherwise it will never ever happen. Or it wont happen in a good way, and we will lose the community and continuity that made this forum great. We will be a forum divided. So my vote goes to getting set up elsewhere ASAP, or forever holding our peace. I presume that moving back here from somewhere else will always be an option in the future if another site doesnt work out

This question comes up so often we need an FAQ. The only problem is

there are lots of Q's and few A's

 

<p>

 

some facts:

 

<p>

 

1-There have not been any controlled, scientific studies of

photochemical breakdown or safety of disposal in home septics (yes, I

searched), but the internet is full of free _anecdotal_ advice that is

worth what it costs you. the variable nature of septic designs, soils,

maintenance, age, and condition would render such a study virtually

irrelevant, which is probably why it hasnt been done

 

<p>

 

2-It is advised that no chemicals be put down home septics, but small

quantities end up there anyway with no apparent ill effects

 

<p>

 

3-Many people have dumped photo chemicals in their septics with no

apparent ill effects, and all present this as evidence of its safety

(see #1 and #4)

 

<p>

 

4-No apparent ill effects is NOT necessarily the same thing as no ill

effects

 

<p>

 

5-Most people agree that small quantities will "probably" do no harm

 

<p>

 

6-There is no way to know when a "small" quantity becomes "large".

Most people will agree that a liter a month is OK, and that 2500

liters probably isnt. Somewhere in between the totally arbitrary and

completely unscientific safety line is crossed

 

<p>

 

7-many people have failing septics and dont even know it. In my area,

50% of septics are failing. If your septic is failing, the question

becomes much larger than "will this harm my septic" and becomes a

matter of basically dumping chemicals directly in your yard

 

<p>

 

8-Many people dont know how to maintain and keep even a new septic in

good condition, let alone an older one. I know people who spent $8000

on a septic, only to have it fail 5 years later due to their failure

to understand how to keep it working.

 

<p>

 

In other words its a decision everyone has to make for themselves,

based on too little information, all of it anecdotal. I limit myself

to an occasional liter down the drain (less than once a month, when

all my buckets are full) and collect most of my waste in 5 gallon

buckets that I got free from a restaurant. The fix goes to hazardous

waste (or try a lab near you), the rest goes to the nearest sewage

treatment plant where they let me dump it right into the soup. If you

do decide to dump it down the drain, you should make the effort to

learn what kind of septic you have, how they work, and how to use and

maintain them properly. You can order a "septic owners manual" at the

U of Minnesota Extension

website.

 

<p>

 

http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:OwM323T5T1AC:www.extension.umn.ed

u/distribution/naturalresources/DD6651.html+septic+owners+manual&hl=en