On Dec 5, 2005, at 10:39 PM, Ender100@aol.com wrote:
> Katharine,
>
> I think I missed a post..... so what caused the Dichromate Stain?
Umm, what? The dichromate stain was caused by superfluous exposure, on
purpose, but what caused it wasn't the point; the point was the
difference between the colors of unpigmented crosslinked gum,
crosslinked gum with dichromate stain, and stained gum that's been
cleared.
This is giving me the giggles. It's an impossible way to carry out a
dialogue. My posts are arriving back two days after I sent them, or not
at all, and I don't think any of us are getting all the posts, so it's
like trying to communicate by pony express or something. Since the
University of Saskatchewan is providing us the use of the server pro
bono, I certainly am not going to complain about the strange behavior
of late. I think I'll wait until the problem with the server is fixed
(maybe it's just extra load at the end of the term) before trying to
continue this discussion. Over,
Katharine
>
> Mark Nelson
> www.PrecisioinDigitalNegatives.com
>
>
> In a message dated 12/5/05 5:02:33 PM, kthayer@pacifier.com writes:
>
>
>
> I accidently sent this to myself instead of to the list, (still
> figuring out my new mail program) so I'm sending it again, to you.
>
> On Dec 3, 2005, at 1:00 PM, Katharine Thayer wrote:
>
> >
> > After I wrote that about dichromate stain, I remembered that I have
> a
> > page showing the color of unstained gum, of dichromate-stained, and
> of
> > cleared stained gum, on my site; here it is if anyone is interested:
> >
> > http://www.pacifier.com/~kthayer/html/gumcolors.html
> >
> > The samples don't show different tones, because it was gum that was
> > exposed without a step tablet or any kind of negative, just hardened
> > gum. that's when I was working on that project of making gum for
> > chemical analysis.
> > kt
> >
>
>
>
Received on Tue Dec 6 09:06:19 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 01/05/06-01:45:09 PM Z CST