From: Philip Trauring (philip@trauring.com)
Date: 12/27/01-08:50:42 PM Z
This doesn't dispute your contention that film/developer combinations
are designed from the beginning, but Applied Science Fiction, the
company that created the Digital ICE scanning software, has designed
a machine that can develop film without a chemical developer. The
call it aptly enough a 'dry film process'. Basically the film is
scanned by the machine and output to a CD or other digital media
without ever creating a negative.
Just thought it was interesting. The web page about this technology is at:
http://www.appliedsciencefiction.com/products/pic/
Philip
>DEAR JOHN,
> I have never seen a conventional film produce an image without
>development. There is no such thing as a sensitivity "built into a film
>{only} at its manufacture". ALL aspects of a film are related to a
>film/developer combination. Yes, of course, some films are faster, finer
>grain, etc due to manufacturing but all of those properties are manifested
>by film/developer/developing condition combinations...not the film alone.
>Manufacturing creates tendencies, development determines the extent to which
>they are manifested...very much like the ongoing debate about the effects of
>genetics and environment on personality traits and abilities.
> I am not talking about the ANSI standard speed which results from some
>very specific exposure and processing conditions (which hardly ever resemble
>the practical conditions of use), I am talking about practical usable speed
>for each users conditions.
>And Diafine or the newer version (I forget the name) for T-max films does
>yield a higher "practical" speed/sensitivity. The first thing I learned at
>RIT in 1969 was NOT to believe any manufacturers but to test under our own
>working conditions...and test we did until I had sensi-strips and practical
>shooting tests on the brain. It was and still is amazing just how far off
>most manufacturers claims are...but of course they can claim that it is due
>to "my" working conditions. "Not all that glistens is gold..."
> CHEERS!
> BOB
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <Grafist@aol.com>
>To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 4:35 PM
>Subject: Re. Increasing Film sensitivity
>
>
>> Re the recent question on the possibility of increasing film sensitivity
>> after exposure.........After some reflection I would submit that the
>> "sensitivity" of a film to light is built into its emulsion at
>manufacture.
>> After exposure the sensitivity of the film would have been all used up, as
>it
>> were. The chemical structure of the silver halides has been changed by the
>> action of light thus creating a "latent" image.Then, all we could do is to
>> develop the latent but invisible image as fully as possible. See previous
>> postings. Alternatively, another possibility would be to treat the film
>> BEFORE exposure to increase its sensitivity. But that was not the
>question,
>> was it? What we are really thinking about is changing the manufacturers
>> rating of a film, innit?
>> Gordon wrote.......
>> >This is the practice of treating film after exposure, but prior to
>> development to >increase a film sensitivity.
> > See you. John - Photographist
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 01/02/02-04:47:33 PM Z CST