From: Katharine Thayer (kthayer@pacifier.com)
Date: 12/21/01-04:03:14 AM Z
Judy Seigel wrote:
>
.
>
> Carl, mea non culpa of "personal test" in the gum-pigment-ratio business
> -- as soon as I realized the PREMISE was wrong, I quit.
The argument that pigment and gum alone must have different staining
properties than pigment and gum with sensitizer added is a persuasive
theoretical argument, as I said before, but as a theoretical argument
its rightness or wrongness can only be determined empirically. Dave and
I have used the pigment test and found that in our shops, it gave good
results that were helpful in our practice. If you haven't tested it,
then your attack on Scopick's credibility is based not even on one
disconfirming test but on an untested theoretical argument.
I felt the attack was unfair and said so; I think I've made my point
clearly, and I have nothing more to say on the matter. Merry Christmas
to all,
Katharine
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 01/02/02-04:47:33 PM Z CST