Hopefully PE and Simon will write in on this one. Over the years as I've tested and practiced with various film/developer combinations, it always struck me how time consuming it is, and how much care is involved in carrying out exhaustive experimental testing leading to meaningful, repeatable results. It requires much repetition, and careful monitoring of variables. I've often wondered, how exactly was this carried out at companies like Kodak and Ilford (in the days before research stopped of course). For example, when a new developer is formulated: never mind the laborious work of testing during the formulation or R&D phase, but what about even after that, when the formulation is complete and developing times and agitation scheme instructions need to be determined for a whole list of films, in different formats? How was this actually done? In the heyday, were there actually teams of people developing film all day in small tanks, large tanks, roll film, sheet film etc etc over and over again? How many times would something be repeated until it was determined to be an experimentally significant result? Do EK and Ilford actually have facilities where people spent most of their time developing film under controlled conditions, at all the different temperatures, for different contrasts, dilutions, and on and on? And what about all the research papers from people like Henn, James etc etc you read about referenced in summary books like Anchell/Troop? Did these big guys have employees working for them testing materials all day? Would those people be grad students, or junior employees? I think I would have enjoyed that sort of grunt work actually.