Re: Pyro nonsense


Don Bryant (dsbryant@worldnet.att.net)
Sun, 31 Jan 1999 16:09:27 -0500


Steve,

I'm not an expert but just read Hutchin's book to find the answer to your
question about what is different about ABC pyro and PMK, there are other
pyro formulas besides those two, they also that have their strong points and
short comings, PMK is the answer to all of most the short comings of other
pyro developers plus adds some new positive traits as well. Believe me I'm
not a fanatic or trendy developer user. I still like HC 110 and I love XTOL.
The world has too many film/developer/paper choices and combinations so I
limit my choices to allow me to make photographs not tests. But PMK is worth
experimenting with, on the other hand if you are perfectly happy with what
you use why bother, life is too short.

Ok I'll shut up and leave it alone, I've said my 2 cents worth. I'm not
trying to be "right" but instead trying to add to the general knowledge pool
through my experiences. Well back to my over equipped darkroom.

Don
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Shapiro <sgshiya@redshift.com>
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Date: Sunday, January 31, 1999 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: Pyro nonsense

>Subject: Pyro nonsense
>
>
>>In a message dated 1/31/1999 10:54:12 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>>sgshiya@redshift.com writes:
>>
>>> I simply think PMK is 1) Not true pyro
>>> and 2) a big to-do of something new.
>>
>>Of all the things said about PMK (and it's cousin Rollo) Pyro on this
list,
>>this is the most rediculous. It only shows that it's easy to criticize
>that
>>which you don't understand. Your dogma
>
>What dogma?
>
>just ran in front of my karma. I
>>tried to hit the brakes, but it was too late.
>>
>
>What are the better qualities about PMK that's absent from Pyro A,B,C?
>
>Here's the break: Do tell. My dogma is: Willing to learn.
>Steve
>>Please...
>>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:48