RE: Lithium palladium vs. "normal" palladium

To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: RE: Lithium palladium vs. "normal" palladium
From: Loris Medici <mail@loris.medici.name>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:15:11 +0200
Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
In-reply-to: <003a01c73b07$851e16e0$0100a8c0@NEWDELL>
List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
References: <000e01c73ab1$b10c3c60$8d00a8c0@D6RJ5R41><007001c73ac5$3efc02e0$ce02500a@altinyildiz.boyner><003a01c73b07$851e16e0$0100a8c0@NEWDELL>
Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.3)

Hi Eric,

Quoting Eric Neilsen <ejnphoto@sbcglobal.net>:

With Lithium Chloride, the problem is that it is extremely deliquessant (sp)
and it absorbs moisture from the air to the point of becoming a liquid. So
to ensure that you have enough actual Li+ and Cl- ions, it would be better
to error on the side of additional weight.

I see, this makes perfect sense then...

I'm still thinking there's an error in the Metal Solution Calculator.

Regards,
Loris.

Follow-Ups:
- RE: Lithium palladium vs. "normal" palladium
  - From: EJN Photo <ejnphoto@sbcglobal.net>

References:
- RE: Lithium palladium vs. "normal" palladium
  - From: EJN Photo <ejnphoto@sbcglobal.net>
- RE: Lithium palladium vs. "normal" palladium
  - From: Loris Medici <mail@loris.medici.name>
- RE: Lithium palladium vs. "normal" palladium
  - From: Eric Neilsen <ejnphoto@sbcglobal.net>