PDA

View Full Version : A Christmas Cookie from Santa



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

holmburgers
03-10-2011, 02:24 PM
I think that two-tiered pricing is necessary, that's all I'll say about that. It seems like a no-brainer. You have a limited, balls-to-the-walls edition that has a premium price tag for collectors and you have the bare-bones worker's edition.

I think that specific issues of densitometry that relate to emulsion making could/should be addressed, but an in depth discussion is not necessary, is it? A good "further reading" section could probably eliminate the need for a chapter on densitometry altogether.

What exactly do you mean by design system and optimization?

I think that if there are things that don't get covered extensively in the book, they should at least be mentioned and again, perhaps suggest literature that does cover them. You'd hate to completely ignore something, thinking it'll be covered in the next edition and what if something happens in the interim? I think it's good to mention things, to at least get it in writing and leave it up to the reader to dig deeper. A reference book, a history book or a technical book should provide as many avenues of research as possible, at the expense of "teasing" the reader if necessary.

*lastly* I agree with the comment that you should have at least a couple non-scientist types review it. You big brains you... you'll all get together and notice that the chemical conversion of A to B is missing an ion and a couple atoms here and over there... but you'll probably miss the fact that you've never explained the meaning of X or Y in the first place. Plus, readability, style, flow have little to do with technical knowledge. If you need any volunteers... I know a guy.

:D

Photo Engineer
03-10-2011, 03:15 PM
Chris;

I'll let you read a copy when you visit Rochester. At least as much as you can during breaks! :D

PE

Athiril
03-10-2011, 03:25 PM
I think you have a real chance to provide otherwise unavailable information that would otherwise be lost to time. I'm of the opinion that such information should take priority. Anything already available (to the general public/your readers) in a detailed manner should be a lower priority to this. I just think you need to give some pointers on recommended reading and prerequisites so that information would be more 'useable' :)

I mean, there's no sense in reinventing the wheel right? Unless all the other wheels up until now have been square :)

Photo Engineer
03-10-2011, 03:39 PM
Athiril;

You have some valid points. Your last statement though is most important. ALL books on actual emulsion making have been square wheels!

This is in the opinion of just about all current Emulsion Scientists.

Wall, Baker, Glafkides and Duffin, to name four, all fail to address modern emulsions (of their time) with real examples and they address their contemporaneous emulsions, where mentioned, with many errors or omissions. One writer admitted in a private comment to someone that most of the emulsions he put in his book had never been tested by him. Many of Glafkides examples are a series of excerpts from the BIOS and FIAT reports, and much of Duffin are repeats from Glafkides. And, as I pointed out in another thread, Glafkides gets the Brovira table wrong.

Wall's books are full of obfuscation if you read them from the POV of an emulsion maker. Baker is better. The original BIOS and FIAT reports are filled with obfuscation and error.

I am trying to say things in a simple manner, but as pointed out above, some want more - they want the reasoning behind things. So, maybe I'll hit the mark or maybe miss it. I can think of 3 or 4 APUG members who will probably pan it just because I wrote it. ;) So from that POV it may not matter what I say anyhow.

But, I hear you and agree, especially about the square wheels!

PE

Athiril
03-10-2011, 04:00 PM
I think the reasoning is important because then you can give people the tools to innovate and create, as opposed to just copying.

Photo Engineer
03-10-2011, 06:34 PM
I think the reasoning is important because then you can give people the tools to innovate and create, as opposed to just copying.

That is very true and is why I do have a short section in my workshops devoted to this. Sometimes it is too advanced though.

PE

rmazzullo
03-10-2011, 08:12 PM
To add my two cents to the discussion....

What is considered too advanced? In different threads in this forum, it has been mentioned that emulsion making information is in many cases, incomplete and / or incorrect by design.

If the "advanced" material adds to a tested, verified and correct foundation from which we can create and at some point, design our own emulsions, then I would definitely like to see this extra theory / information included, even if I am not immediately prepared to use it. I will, in time, get to the point where successful efforts will require answers to the questions that will inevitably arise. More advanced information may answer a lot of those questions, and it will be complete and correct, and add to the knowledge base.

Thanks,

Bob M.

Athiril
03-10-2011, 08:32 PM
That's one small step for PE, one giant leap for APUG-kind.

Photo Engineer
03-10-2011, 09:00 PM
Hey, I'm in a vacuum here guys! ;)

PE

rmazzullo
03-10-2011, 09:06 PM
PE,

Sorry 'bout that.... :)

Bob M.

Photo Engineer
03-10-2011, 09:09 PM
About what? I'm on the moon taking one small step and standing in a vacuum and you are sorry? How. :D

Athiril
03-10-2011, 09:17 PM
Mean while the rest of us have discovered pointy sticks! :D

Photo Engineer
03-10-2011, 09:23 PM
Don't puncture my space suit!

Ray Rogers
03-11-2011, 01:48 AM
ALL books on actual emulsion making have been square wheels!


Could you describe in what way your book "rounds the square"?

rmazzullo
03-11-2011, 08:04 AM
About what? I'm on the moon taking one small step and standing in a vacuum and you are sorry? How. :D

Oops....my bad; I thought you meant you were being left out of the immediate commentary.....

Photo Engineer
03-11-2011, 10:18 AM
Could you describe in what way your book "rounds the square"?

Ray;

I am covering every aspect of modern emulsion making and comparing it to the "facts" in those old books. I am doing my best to leave nothing out and nothing ambiguous, and I have made every emulsion in the book! Contrast this to all other texts.

PE

holmburgers
03-11-2011, 11:07 AM
I think it might be important to point out the errors and misrepresentations present in past books on emulsion making. It sounds like this is information that you have discovered through private communications, unpublished sources, etc., no?

Your book can be the almighty cleanse of bad emulsion literature in the past.

Random side note; I hear that E.J. Wall and F.E. Ives had some bad blood between them. Ives writes about it in his autobiography. Wall seems to have been the perpetrator... at least according to Ives.

Photo Engineer
03-11-2011, 11:10 AM
Wall and Eder did not get along well either from what I hear.

But yes, I am trying to clarify the record.

PE

Ray Rogers
03-11-2011, 12:32 PM
I agree with Chris.
If you know of specific errors or what have you, why don't you just point them out.

Ray

Photo Engineer
03-11-2011, 01:36 PM
I am not going through each book with specifics directed to each formula. For example, it is sufficient to say that Wall quite consistently omits addition times of Silver Nitrate to Salt + Gelatn. He omits reactant temperatures in most places, and he omits gelatin type (hard, medium and slow or low ripening). Thats enough said.

PE