Understood Lowell.Lowell Huff wrote:Hello Keith:
The formulas were given to me in confidence. As an ethical person and manufacturer, I must respect that confidence.
Moderator: Keith Tapscott.
I was referring to difficulties in manufacturing, not complexity or sophistication. Hell, Plutonium is damned difficult to manufacture, and it's a single element!.Lowell Huff wrote:Hello Mr. Ornello:
No, the formulas are not any more sophisticated than most modern formulas. That being said, they are more sophisticated than the formulas that originated at "the begining of time."
Precisely. Stand development works best with horizontally placed flat glass plates, since gravity does not affect the by-products of development differentially when they cannot move away from their point of origin because the plate is perpendicular to the pull of gravity. It is an obsolete technique, and as I said it worked well only with glass plates.Lowell Huff wrote:Hello Gary
Thank you for your support. I have times and temps charts that i can email for both hand and machine processing. There is no need to experiment for starting times.
As for foma, Efke films, ect., i have info on those allso. please keep in mind that the chemistry does not know the color of the box thaat the film was shipped. Developing times are based on the E.I., exposure, processing temperature and aggitation. So the starting point for Foma 400 is the same as TRi X in our developer.
STAND DEVELOPMENT, since i am a scientist not a artist, i have never understood why anyone would want to do such a proceedure. It is not scientific. email@example.com