Re: development for alt-process

• To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
• Subject: Re: development for alt-process
• From: Richard Sullivan FRPS <richsul@earthlink.net>
• Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 11:33:03 -0600
• Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
• In-reply-to: <3AD5CDEC.2646FC6C@worldnet.att.net>
• References: <v01520d01b6fb6bb64795@[209.144.25.201]>
• Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca

Shannon,

The numbers you come up with sound about right.

You asked an honest question and deserve a respectful answer. Ignore any 
condescending and insulting comments you may receive.

--Dick Sullivan
www.bostick-sullivan.com


At 11:46 AM 4/12/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>shannon stoney wrote:
> > I am still working on figuring out a development time for negatives for
> > cyanotypes and palladium.
>
>I just finished an update to my information on simultaneous exposure and
>development control in my guide.  Is there any reason why you cannot
>figure this out when provided with a step-by-step procedure to do so?
>Do you not have access to the internet to read my guide?
>
>How can one be truly serious about the use of a photographic process, if
>they will not break away from pursuit of some "magic" number?
>
>Shannon, if you truly wish to learn, then learn.  I really feel people
>would be providing you a disservice to spoon feed you any more
>development times.
>
>--
>Jeffrey D. Mathias
>http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/

• References:
  • development for alt-process
    • From: sstoney@pdq.net (shannon stoney)
  • Re: development for alt-process
    • From: "Jeffrey D. Mathias" <jeffrey.d.mathias@worldnet.att.net>

• Prev by Date: Re: development for alt-process
• Next by Date: Re: development for alt-process
• Prev by thread: Re: development for alt-process
• Next by thread: Re: development for alt-process
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread