From: Christina Z. Anderson (tracez@mcn.net)
Date: 05/28/01-09:41:55 PM Z
> I wonder if that paper on the "old brown" developer myth you're talking
> about is the one I read -- if so it's WRONG WRONG WRONG. I don't recall if
> it was Jolly or Rainwater, but it says that the reason "old brown
> developer" works is because the hydroquinone is worn out, and that his
> solarol has no (or very little) hydroquinone, yatatyatata.... but the
> dirtiest oldest brownest developer I ever used had ADDED hydroquinone and
> did the best sabatier I ever made... something like an extra teaspoon per
> tray, if memory serves. (It's in P-F #2.)
> I tested, incidentally, against everything EXACTLY the same except the
> developer was new -- it did "sabatier," but not anywhere near as
> wonderful. The difference was almost certainly the silver in the old
> developer, allowing for physical development
Yes, it is absolutely this "old brown myth" they state: that the reason
sabatier occurs is that the hydroquinone is exhausted, thus they advocate
use of a hydroquinone free developer formula which Jolly gives in his paper
on the web, and Rainwater now sells (in Australia, I think?). They say it
is not the silver. So, hmmm, what I would need to do is test their
developer formula side by side, same day same temp, with used Dektol and
see. I, too, in my testing this year, did not find Solarol to work very
well at all, and my favorite sabatier was with old brown. That was before I
read Jolly's 5 myths. So I assumed his assessment of why the old brown
worked was correct. The other thing he said which I find interesting is
that there are papers that do not work for sabatier because they are
developer incorporated. Haven't tested that theory out yet, but will..
Chris
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 07/12/01-11:29:40 AM Z CST