[alt-photo] Re: DESICCATE! DESICCATE!

BOB KISS bobkiss at caribsurf.com
Thu Jul 29 12:23:23 GMT 2010 

DEAR MAREK ET ALIA,
	Thanks to all for your suggestions.
	Marek, bloody brilliant!  At least, if I mix it myself instead of
waiting for the moisture to attack I will know the exact concentration.  Of
course, I will look up the solubility of the Am Thio to be certain that I am
doing it right. 
		CHEERS!
			BOB

-----Original Message-----
From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org
[mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of
Marek Matusz
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 8:33 PM
To: alt photo
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: DESICCATE! DESICCATE!


Bob,

insted of battling them join them. Make a 50% solution and keep it that way
in a good grade chemical resistant bottle. This way you will know what to
weight. Ammonium thiocyanate is stable in solution and not going anywhere. I
kept mine for a number of years (maybe 6). Maybe it will keep for 600 years.
It is still somewhere, but I have not made toners in a few years.

Marek 
 
> From: bobkiss at caribsurf.com
> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:41:19 -0400
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: DESICCATE! DESICCATE! DANCE TO THE MUSIC!
> 
> DEAR LIST,
> This thread has been very interesting. When I first posted with the
> "Desiccate" subject, I received two posts with suggestions as to how to
keep
> my powder dry (Ammonium Thiocyanate, that is) and the rest, under the same
> "subject" were of a different nature.
> But, if I may return to the topic, does anyone else have any
> suggestions how to keep my pound of Ammonium Thiocyanate from turning into
a
> plastic jar of solution with some crystals at the bottom?
> CHEERS!
> BOB
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org
> [mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf
Of
> ender100 at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 4:06 PM
> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: DESICCATE! DESICCATE! DANCE TO THE MUSIC!
> 
> Hi Diana,
> 
> 
> My apologies, if you took my post personally-it isn't about you. I think
> your post and the thread it belonged to just popped some issues related to
> the list up above the level of animal awareness in my brain.... or perhaps
> even vegetable awareness, so I hit respond rather than taking the time to
> start a new thread and look up the list address. So my sin is probably
> laziness. I hope you didn't feel that I "jumped on you" and will forgive
my
> sin.
> 
> 
> But then, we did all benefit by learning more about you personally from
your
> reply, so it wasn't a total loss. Also, I appreciate that you are a
"direct
> person." Directness is a good thing.
> 
> 
> So again my apologies for the misunderstanding that led to you having to
> spend time writing such a complete and intelligent response. But
apparently
> you felt we did find some common ground of agreement so that is good.
> 
> 
> Probably my sense of humor is an acquired taste-as my children could
> certainly attest to-but then they were a captive audience and I had years
to
> brainwash them. Now, my daughter Kaddiddlehopper, seems to be bent on
> passing it on to the next generation. Hopefully this will not lead to
> worldwide conflict. Maybe that is why I usually identify weird comments
> that strike me as humorous by the tag line "hehehehe", which in this case
I
> failed to do-and look at the consequences of that failure-you could have
> probably made 3-4 gum prints in the time you took to reply. But I am glad
> for your gracious reply. 
> 
> 
> Don't they say that music is just pure mathematics? But then, I too
> digress.
> 
> 
> Maybe we should all start posts with "I'm new to the list"?
> 
> 
> Back to my closet.
> 
> 
> Best Wishes, 
> 
> 
> Mark Nelson 
> www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com 
> www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com 
> PDNPrint Forum @ Yahoo Groups 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Diana Bloomfield <dhbloomfield at bellsouth.net>
> To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list
> <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
> Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2010 2:11 pm
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: DESICCATE! DESICCATE! DANCE TO THE MUSIC!
> 
> 
> Hi Mark, 
> 
> Just to clarify-- my comment wasn't really about the "creativity of [my]
> marital relationship" (or, perhaps that comment was an attempt at being
> amusing?-- I honestly can never tell); it was, rather, a comment that once
> one gets to a certain level, those who are at that level consider
> mathematics to also be highly creative (as creative, in its own way, as--
> say-- the visual arts). I suspect that's true for those in the sciences as
> well. I remember when our daughter was in high school, and one of only 3
> females in her advanced physics class-- she was good, but I remember her
> saying that she would never go into that field, because-- although she was
> good at it-- she didn't nearly have the vision and imagination that a few
of
> her classmates (who did go on to be physics majors in college and on into
> graduate school) had, and she felt that would always hold her back-- in
that
> particular field. That's just a little aside. The follow-up post I made to
> my original post was really just an explanation that, since I might have
> implied math and science aren't creative, too, I do know they are and can
> be-- and didn't want anybody jumping on me about that comment. Of course,
> it never dawned on me I'd have to explain that little explanation as
well--
> but, what do you know, here I am having to do just that. 
> 
> On to the topic at hand-- I am in complete agreement with what you write
> here. I have no idea why you felt the need to write that to me,
> specifically in response to what I just wrote. Perhaps this is just the
> nature of emails/posts, which are so different from dialogue when people
are
> in an actual room, talking to each other. 
> 
> While I absolutely do appreciate, like to understand, and value the
> chemistry involved in alt processes-- I will, once again, say that had
> anyone ever talked about molarity, or attempted to teach a beginning alt
> process class in that way to me (yikes-- all those equations?!)-- again, I
> would have most certainly bolted for the nearest exit, and never ventured
> further. I would have (wrongly) assumed that alt processes required more
> math and chemistry than I was willing to contemplate. The key word here,
> Mark, is "beginning." I also suspect that Loris's students are quite
> different from the ones I find myself teaching. 
> 
> I agree that there is a "need for tolerance" on topics, and I was stunned
by
> the quality of the discourse on this particular topic. I often wonder if
> people would have a real dialogue with others in the same way, were they
> speaking to each other in "real life." 
> 
> But . . . nothing I said in my earlier post suggested that I think topics
> should be shut down, that topics on science or chemistry are inappropriate
> or "silly," or that whatever anybody might write is pointless, stupid, or
> "off-bounds." I choose not to talk about step wedges and equations, but
> that's just me. I read most every post here, regardless--even detailed
> comments on processes about which I know nothing-- hell, I didn't even use
> the delete key when we got to pink thongs-- or was it a thong? Hmm . . . 
> 
> But I digress. My point is-- I agree with you. What made you think I
> didn't? Just because I said I would have been turned off by all that
> chemistry in a beginning alt photo class/photography class? Well, I would
> have been. And I personally wouldn't teach a beginning printing class that
> way, either. That's not to say that anything anyone has written about all
> this is wrong, or how someone else might teach is wrong, or what they've
> said is "inappropriate." Frankly, I don't think what I've said is, either.
> And if I ever thought I had the ability, in a post no-less, to shut down a
> conversation-- then, wow-- I'm a better writer than I ever knew possible. 
> 
> I will say that I've taken all kinds of classes over the decades with some
> really excellent teachers-- amazing artists, some of whom are actually
> "famous" and some of whom aren't-- but all really good at what they do,
and
> how they teach in a classroom. I'm thankful that I've always learned
> something in every art class I've ever taken, and that not one of those
> teachers has ever sent me running for the exit. 
> 
> One last point-- I'm a pretty direct person, Mark-- in emails, posts, and
in
> real life. Whatever I post here, I'd also say the same thing in person. No
> double meanings, no "inside" jokes, and no reading between the lines with
> me. What I say is usually what I mean, and mostly it's just my opinion. 
> 
> To answer your last question, though, I suspect the reason so many list
> members don't post and only lurk-- is because they're terrified of
> expressing an opinion, and then having someone else post, and first, of
> course, mention how long they themselves have been a list member, and then
> go on to "attack" the poster and post they're commenting on, based on
ideas
> and opinions that the poster never actually expressed or thought. Yep,
> that's what I think. Again, just my opinion. 
> 
> Oh wait. I forgot. :) Carry on. 
> 
> ~Diana 
> 
> On Jul 28, 2010, at 1:52 PM, ender100 at aol.com wrote: 
> 
> > Hi Diana, 
> > 
> > 
> > I won't venture to comment on the creativity of your marital >
> relationship, but I would like to comment about posting on the list > and
> what is "appropriate." 
> > 
> > 
> > When I first came on the list I enjoyed lurking and gleefully read > all
> the posts until one day the topic of Pyro came up and there were >
seemingly
> endless posts on the topic. Since I did not use Pyro, it > wasn't all that
> interesting and eventually I thought I would have to > shoot myself if I
> read another post on the topic. Later it was gum > stain tests that tested
> my ability to maintain concentration. > However, since that time I've
> totally reversed my views on this issue. 
> > 
> > 
> > I feel at this point that there is a real need for tolerance on > topics
> and even the quantity of posts on topics. I am not saying > that pissing
> matches on topics are appropriate, unless they are > truly entertaining
and
> witty. True, every list has a few compulsive > responders, but that is the
> nature of the human condition. 
> > 
> > 
> > Through the benevolence of people like Kees, Gord before him, and >
> others, we have an alt photo list. Beyond that, the list, in a > sense,
> belongs to "the people" and members should be able to post > and discuss
> whatever they feel is relevant, as long as it is > reasonably on topic.
> Though, I do find that little anecdotes that > people share about their
> personal lives, such as Chris's pink > thongs, makes them more "real" and
> helps to fill in the blanks > regarding who the list members are. 
> > 
> > 
> > I think posts about the art, the craft, and the science of alt photo >
> should all be welcomed-I don't see that any one category should be >
> considered less appropriate. The recent molarity polarity > discussions
> have been interesting to some and not so to others, but > then what
> difference does that make. Is there a topic that Everyone > is passionate
> about and wants to discuss? I doubt it. 
> > 
> > 
> > Perhaps I am a bit sensitive to the issue of the "science" of alt >
photo
> being considered a silly topic in light of the Sarah Palin/Tea > Party
> movement "ignorance of science and facts" is to be applauded-> but then
that
> is venturing off-topic. As they always say, you have > a Delete Key if you
> don't want to read a thread on the list. We use > our personal "delete
key"
> all the time (without thinking about it > twice) when we read the news,
> choose a book, watch television, and > surf the web. 
> > 
> > 
> > I think that placing topics off bounds or silly does more to hurt > the
> list than help the list. It inhibits people. The list had, I > believe
> over 500 members, of which only perhaps 10% posted > regularly. Why don't
> the rest of the members post? Do they fear > they will be laughed at or
> made fun of or branded wackos for > venturing to post a thought or
question
> that someone who posts > frequently might criticize? 
> > 
> > 
> > I say give peace a chance...ooops, wrong topic... I say give people > a
> chance to express themselves freely on the list as long as they do > it in
a
> respectful fashion. If they don't, the list owner can > easily bounce them
> off, as Gord did in the past when "unnamed" > persons pushed the rhetoric
> beyond the limits of respectful > discourse. Clearly a small percentage of
> people have an adolescent > need either be the center of attention and
will
> foment arguments > just to remain there, or have past grudges that cause
> them to return > to the list for revenge and to destroy the list-but they
> are easily > deleted too by the list owners Big Delete Key in the Sky. ;) 
> > 
> > 
> > OK, back to my closet. 
> > 
> > 
> > Best Wishes, 
> > 
> > 
> > Mark Nelson 
> > www.PrecisionDigitalNegatives.com 
> > www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com 
> > PDNPrint Forum @ Yahoo Groups 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:W
L:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1
_______________________________________________
Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5323 (20100729) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

More information about the Alt-photo-process-list mailing list