randevan (randevan@rain.org)
Wed, 24 Mar 1999 19:33:57 -0800
At 05:19 PM 3/23/99 +0000, you wrote:
> 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?
I was hired by Focal Press to edit and organize the first, self published,
edition of Richard Henry's book. What is currently in print was a result of
that effort.This was over ten years ago, perhaps more. Henry had just
passed away and Focal felt the book was worth reprinting. As for the
content, I think highly of the methods used by Henry to test various
materials and processes used in photography. Henry was employed as a
research scientist and was well versed in the scientific method. We have
confirmed many of his theories here at Brooks Institute. Can all of his
tests and results be taken as absolute truth? Well, let me answer that by
example. The thinking was, until last week, that a high fat diet was
directly related to the risk of developing breast cancer in women. New
research now indicates there is no connection between diet and risk.
My point? Testing with repeatable results may answer the question for one
researcher, but not necessary all.
Rand Evan Molnar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:09:05