Re: Gum problem(s)

Martin,

there are many reason why this is not a good idea, I mean sending out
"copies" of a book. First it must certainly be illegal, remember there are
folks on this list that publish books, they might not like this idea either.
Next you may find out that some mail server don't digest very well megabytes
of emails.

I just thought you may want to think about the possible implications.

Regards
Yves

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Koch-Schulte" <mkochsch@shaw.ca>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: Gum problem(s)

> I would be very thankful if you would send me a copy Martin.
>
> Cheers.
> ~m
>
>
> MARTINM wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <Ender100@aol.com>
> > To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 8:40 AM
> > Subject: Re: Gum problem(s)
> >
> >
> >> Just wondering if you could point me to the source for the spectra of
> >> sensitivity for different alt processes?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Mark Nelson
> >
> >
> > Being active in a somewhat different area (www.polygrama.com) mainly,
> > I don't quite feel qualified to answer your question. I assume Kosar
> > would be a good starting point. "Kosar" would imply not only his book
> > but both the literature he quotes from and the patents he refers to.
> > By the way I scanned the whole book to my computer (resulting in a
> > slightly messed up pagination). So I might be in the position to send
> > out the whole thing to those interested. That would be two
> > multi-paged TIF files (5.8MB and 4.6MB large)...
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> In a message dated 11/22/05 9:30:39 AM, martinm@SoftHome.net writes:
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Sandy King" <sanking@clemson.edu>
> >>> To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
> >>> Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:35 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: Gum problem(s)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Dichromated colloid processes, including carbon and gum, have a
> >>>> maximum peak in the near UV at about 360 nm to 370 nm, varying
> >>>> slightly with pH and type of dichromate. From the peak at 360-370
> >>>> nm, sensitivity falls off sharply to about 320 nm, at which point
> >>>> it starts to rise to another, and much large, peak at around 200
> >>>> nm, where it has its maximum sensitivity. The peak at 200 nnm is
> >>>> really huge compared to the one at 360-70 nm, like Mt. Everest to
> >>>> the highest peaks in the Appalachians. On the other side
> >>>> sensitivity falls off very gradually in the violet and blue to
> >>>> near zero at around 520 nm.
> >>>
> >>> I don't think that's entirely accurate for dichromated colloid
> >>> systems. I guess the data you quote, apply to the absorption
> >>> spectra of a dichromated water solution.
> >>> When it comes to dichromated colloids, sensitivity peaks might be
> >>> considerably shifted towards longer wavelengths. By the way,
> >>> speaking of DCG holography (dichromated gelatin), there are lots of
> >>> people to expose their DCG layer at 532nm...
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Mark Nelson
> >> Precision Digital Negatives
>
>
Received on Thu Nov 24 07:38:44 2005