Re: bergger

Not so fast, Not so simple.

Its true, the silver rich hype is usually just an
advertising device, and emulsion technology (not modern
now!) from the last century allows one to achieve good
density, contrast and tonality with much less silver than
once before.

However

I believe that a greater quantity of silver is good for
increasing the expected longevity of the image.

I disagree with your blanket statement that the less
silver used in photographic film and paper the better.

(Ryuji, are you really a strong supporter of chromagenic
film?!! Why or why not?)

Perhaps someone else on the list (Dave?) might have more
information or opinions on this, but it seems reasonable
to me that a little bit more than the bare minimum
necessary is not a bad idea.

I should mention that I am talking about final silver
metal content and not silver halide....

> Therefore, the fact that a product contains more
> silver means that the production is based on inferior
emulsion technology, inferior polymer
> technology, or both.

I disagree.

The very reason there is so much variation in products in
the first place is because there is leeway.

Inferior?

Less efficient is not the same thing as inferior.

---
;+)
In photography, inferior refers to pictures taken by other
people.
;+)
---
But seriously, I think the silver rich idea does have some
validity, as there IS leeway and those at the top end are
more preferable to me than those at the lower end... 
I won't argue about it... I just wanted to share my views.
Now its back to the Jungle....
Ray
--------------------------------------
GANBARE! NIPPON!
Yahoo! JAPAN JOC OFFICIAL INTERNET PORTAL SITE PARTNER
http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/ganbare-nippon/