From: Sandy King (sanking@CLEMSON.EDU)
Date: 12/05/02-11:28:58 AM Z
I thank Judy for her explanation regarding the Pyrocat posting that
was taken by me as an attempt to censor list messages, or at least to
direct them toward areas that she found more interesting, and accept
her explanation that it was in jest. Judy is correct in noting that
the name Pyrocat was first suggested by her and the first version of
the formula was printed in Post-Factory as part of an article that I
did not staining developers, both pyrogallol and pyrocatechin.
My apologies to those devoted followers of gum who may have been
offended by my missive on the nature of gum printing. I am really
quite fond of gum printing, though I have sworn to never try it again.
Finally, best advice to all who don't care about a particular thread
is "use the delete buttom." Takes a lot less time than any amount of
ruminations on what is or is not on topic, what is or is not
interesting, and blah, blah, blah.
Best to all,
Sandy King
>Scott, that was in jest. I believe in fact that the first appearance of
>Pyrocat in print was in Post-Factory Photography (tho I think it had
>already been on a website, or an earlier version of it had, tho I count on
>being corrected if I'm wrong).
>
>Post-Factory is an alternative photography publication (now with
>subscribers in 32 countries, or maybe it's 34, I lost count) I do on my
>little home computer, that weighs enough to crash into China.... In fact,
>since I'm boasting this week, permit me to mention that I actually gave
>pyrocat its name. It was called something like HHD, which I thought might
>not be, let's say as catchy as it deserved.
>
>That was in Post-Factory # 4... The one caught in the "upgrade" is #8, but
>I may have mentioned that. Meanwhile, the same Sandy King who invented
>pyrocat is on this list dispensing upgrades, whether or not there are as
>many of them as there are gum messages, tho lately clearly Pyrocat is King!
>
>Meanwhile, I very much regret that what I thought was so obviously in jest
>that I didn't give it a second thought was taken as a serious rebuke to
>pyrocat and/or Sandy. It was 4 in the morning & looking for an ironic
>remark, something that was CLEARLY like motherhood and apple pie to take a
>poke at, I said it. Next time I'll say.... what .... how adorable some of
>these fellas are? Oh, that's obvious too. I'll try to think of something
>else -- now it's 3:56 AM...
>
>As for making negatives for all those processes -- I think all film
>processing is going to get problematic, at least if the curve of
>discontinuance continues as it has. And since some of my fans clearly
>read my messages VERRRRY carefully, the sweethearts (oh some men simply
>cannot STAND for a woman to have her own organ), I'll say that even now,
>with all the complications, I find the digital negative irresistible.
>
>The learning curve is steep -- I used to teach a class to make a passable
>large neg on film in a morning, and of course at this stage learning to
>make a digital negative is much longer, harder, and more expensive -- but
>once you grasp the possibilities for CONTROL, it's a kind of freedom --
>and a route to perfection-- you could never get with a large camera.
>
>I'll add that, slogging bravely through the trauma, I'm completing a 10
>page article for P-F on making digital negatives: "Advice from a Beginner"
>-- not exactly Burkholder for Dummies, but an attempt to lay out some of
>the parts that weren't so obvious, and even a few things I figured out
>myself, AND some sources -- like really cheap EXCELLENT ink cartridges,
>and a substrate several folks like better than Pictorico (at half the
>price) and this and that...
>
>Oh PS. Lest someone try to imagine I'm taking a swipe at Burkholder, I
>mention his holy name about every paragraph....
>
>Anyway, cheers for now, and be my guest: pyrocat away !
>
>Judy
>
>
>On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Scott Wainer wrote:
>
>> Appoligies to all - I was under the impression that this list
>>dealt with information concerning all areas of "Alternative"
>>process.
> >
>> Being new to the list, I was looking for a source information that would
>> help me create negatives for making Albumen, Chrysotype, Cyanotype,
>> Kallitypes, Platinum, Salted Paper, and Van Dyke prints; as well as
>> Silver Gelatin.
>>
>> I did not intend to offend anyone by asking a question concerning
>>Pyrocat-HD.
>>
>>
>> Scott Wainer
>> smwbmp@starpower.net
>>
--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:25 AM Z CST