Re: Gum prints with the enlarger
Risa S. Horowitz (babbleon@terraport.net)
Sat, 20 Apr 1996 19:34:44 -0400
s.)
>
>If what is claimed is true (Klaus - have you any quantitative details about
>exposure?), it's certainly worth *far more* than a measly $400, and the
>chap should have no difficulty exploiting it and making his fortune. As
>Judy said - it's a once-in-a-hundred-years discovery. Just think what it
>could do for the commercial maker of permanent colour prints (e.g.
>UltraStable or EverColor), or holography (for which the best medium is
>dichromated gelatin) or the use of photoresists in the printing industry,
>or digital imaging.
>
>The fact that it is being offered to amateurs for so little, makes me dubious.
>
In this instance I'd like to suggest that given the fee this particular chap
is asking for, and given the number of gum printers on earth today, well,
the math just doesn't add up.
This once-in-a-hundred year discovery I'm certain has little potential of
being exploited for fortune making what with where the majority of
photo-based profit making seems to lie these days: i.e. digital and consumer
(soon to be APS, but darned I hope not).
Let him take it to his grave. There's plenty for me to play with in a lifetime!
ummm, errr, think I just got the wit of this posting I responded to. Oh
well, I have time to catch up! {laughing}