Thank gawd there is someone geekier than me! But wait... Rodinal has
been around longer (maybe by quite a bit) than D-76, so maybe it's still
a contest twixt us. BTW, doesn't that solvent in the D-76 throw away
some of what you paid for? <ducking>
Earl
Walt Wayman wrote:
>Heavens to Betsy, Earl! I guess I'm geekier than you. I love Rodinol, even
>for Plus-X sometimes, but I never wet my Tri-X, shot at ASA 400, with anything
>but D-76 1:1 @ 70F. for 9 minutes. Talk about stuck in a rut, but then, if it
>ain't broke....
>
>Walt
>
>--
>"Anything more than 500 yards from
>the car just isn't photogenic." --
>Edward Weston
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>From: Earl Dunbar <edunbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
>>R. Jackson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Jul 12, 2005, at 3:54 PM, Earl Dunbar wrote:
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>Well, it's better to be a geek, uncool, or whatever, and get the shot
>>captured/processed well than to be at the bleeding edge. I am used to
>>Tri-X @ 200 in HC-110 in my sleep, with great results; I never believed
>>in the "effective film speed depends on developer" school Zone III
>>detail is Zone III detail, and if you ain't got it, it's an exposure
>>issue, not a developer issue, IM. Now that Tri-X has changed, it's
>>apparently a true 400, I don't have a workflow for it. I have one or
>>two rolls exposed at 400, and I'll probably soup one in Rodinal 1:50 and
>>one in DD-X 1:4 and see what it looks like.
>>
>>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|