[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Photo Chemicals Care Taken(was: Re: WAY OFF TOPIC/..USAcentric..)



>
> Steve, I'm surprised that you, a very knowledgeable photographer, would
> introduce a subject that seems to indicate a dangerous condition. These
> materials have existed for years, their pros and cons are well documented,
> and I certainly wouldn't have thought you capable of using scare tactics.
> Besides, make sure your terms are correct before airing them in public.
Shame!
>
>
> Sil Horwitz, FPSA
> Technical Editor, PSA Journal

I accept your slap on the hand, Sil; it looked silly -- the spelling of
Benzene, to me and I mispelt the work.

That is a dangereous practice in chemistry; and I always take a long time
and cross reference every idea before trying it.

Using gloves is a given, with me; and I've become adept at 'feeling' through
the latex or derrivitives now offedred.

Pyro formulas, by the way, are greatly distorted.  The original Pyro ABC was
a developer using an acid compound from a Chinese beetle nut, Pyrogallolic
acid.  The PMK formulas that Gordon Hutchings has made so popular is one tht
contains Metol, another developer and thereby places Pyrogallol as a
staining agent not the developer.

Which are the Benzene developers and do they not reduce the grain?  Why were
they improved upon out ofthe series with glycin, metol; and [gee you already
said] hydroquonine, (MQ) and phenodine (PQ) dedvelopers ... so are they all
a form of Benzene developers, these developers we find so useful?

S. Shapiro, Carmel, CA