Richard Knoppow (dickburk@ix.netcom.com)
Tue, 23 Mar 1999 23:31:40 -0800
At 05:19 PM 3/23/99 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>In an effort (possibly futile) to obtain more consistency in my developing
>and printing processes, I'm working my way (determinedly albeit slowly)
>through Richard Henry's Controls in B&W Photography. Lots of good stuff in
>there, but my eyes tend to glaze over and my brain fills up if I try to
>absorb too much at one time.
>
>My question.
>Of those of you out there with a close familiarity with this book, is the
>majority of what he presents "non-controversial"? i.e. Will I be led
>down a path of ruin and destruction if I place too much faith in his
>teachings? Mr. Henry certainly can shoot from the hip, and is not afraid
>to name names, or to speak The Truth as he has researched it. (My
>apologies if you are listening in, Mr. Henry, as I say this with a certain
>measure of respect.)
>
>What other books are out there that are similar in scope and purpose that
>could serve to provide either a confirmation of Henry's findings or present
>a researched dissenting opinion?
>Enquiring minds want to know.....
>
>In regard to recent thoughts on agitation and development, Henry's research
>indicated (and is supported by others) that to get as close to uniform
>transmission density as possible when developing roll film in film roll
>tanks, that "vigorous and continuous agitation is required." His research
>experiments showed that despite developing in this method, at best you will
>end up with negatives with a 5-9% increase in density along the lateral
>edges of the film as compared to the density at the center of the film.
>Henry's most consistent results with reel development were with a home-made
>machine that rotated an Omega 2-reel 120 tank end-for-end at 60 rpm, while
>at the same time rotating the tank along its central axis at about 130 rpm.
> Very uneven development was noted when only end-over-end tank rotation was
>used. Development times with this apparatus were about 60% of the "normal"
>intermittent inversion and rotation procedure times needed to obtain
>equivalent densities.
>
>John Erbes
>Milwaukee, WI
>
To add to an already large thread, its an excellent book. I strongly
advise getting the second edition if you have only the first. Dr. Henry
made considerable corrections and additions in it. Unfortunately he died
before it went to press so the book suffers from some lack of review which
he would have given it.
As far as other books, there simply aren't any others similar to this one.
Dr. Henry was a graduate chemist and brought both chemical expertise and
good research method to his writings. He took on many of the tenets of
popular wisdom in photography and proved they were myth. There are
certainly some excellent scientific texts in photography but they are
mainly aimed at the specialist and are not at all easy. The best known is
the famous _The Theory of the Photographic Process_ 2 editions edited by
C.E.K.Mees and later editions by T.H.James both of Kodak labs. Even the
first edition is still a valuable source of information but none of them
are at all easy.
----
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles,Ca.
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:09:04