Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,945   Posts: 1,585,828   Online: 983
      
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910
Results 91 to 97 of 97
  1. #91

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,576
    Images
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
    I am not running down Sandy's work, but rather trying to indicate how much more goes into the work done at primary R&D labs. Please don't trivialize the work done at Kodak, Fuji, Agfa etc. And I don't intend to trivialize Sandy's work. I just mean to show how much more is done at the professional R&D level.

    PE
    IMO you have been doing just that, no one has said that the research has been at the same level as one of the corp. R&D levels, nor do I think anyone would think that. Sandy's contribution is a tangible one is all that I am saying.
    Mike C

    Rambles

  2. #92

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,268
    Quote Originally Posted by magic823
    Having taken a workshop from Sandy and talking with him about this, I would say its well researched.
    Having asked Sandy directly what steps he took in the development of Pyrocat, I understand that he has put a lot of time, effort, and thought into the formulation.

    But I also see PhotoEngineer's point that there are certain tools that are unavailable to even the advanced photo tinkerers that hang out on this board. Sensitometers, (macro) densitometers, and eyes can't do everything. Certain tools like microdensitometers are just something that we are not going to be able to come by easily. Even looking at resolution targets under a microscope - differences are not going to be fully obvious due to the inherent properties (i.e limitations) of our vision. And then we add in the factor of stain, and all bets are off with making comparisons of visual observations, especially if comparing stained films with the completely different spectral characteristics that can be found even between pyrogallol and pyrocatechol based developers.

    I suggested earlier this year that we should all get together and try to come up with a "standardized" system of film testing, or at least some well thought out guidelines that we can use to help minimize some of the time that is spend debating properties that we really can't prove one way or the other.

    Kirk - www.keyesphoto.com

  3. #93

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    [
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
    I think you missed my point. Hard data with comparisons are involved in this 5 year test period for films and developers. Not just sensitometry, but granularity and sharpness are compared and quantized. The results take out subjective measure of good vs bad and normalize viewer bias. Mees describes this.

    I am not running down Sandy's work, but rather trying to indicate how much more goes into the work done at primary R&D labs. Please don't trivialize the work done at Kodak, Fuji, Agfa etc. And I don't intend to trivialize Sandy's work. I just mean to show how much more is done at the professional R&D level.

    PE
    I did not take it at all that you were running down my work, or that of anyone else here doing developer formulation. However, outside of testing acutance, which I have not been able to figure out how to do without investing a huge amount into the project, I am confident that much of my tests is as thorough and revealing as anything the people at the R&D labs might be able to do, within the limits of my application of course.

    Ultimately where I think we disagree is in the evaluation of grain and sharpness. This, in my opinion, can not be tested with machines. I don’t disregard the importance of testing that quantifies such things as sharpnes and grain, but the final evaluation can never be anything but the human eye. And never just one ey, because no matter how good the eye there is always the possibility of individual bias. So well-designed tests that use many people are the best measure of grain and sharpness.

    Sandy

  4. #94

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirk Keyes
    Having asked Sandy directly what steps he took in the development of Pyrocat, I understand that he has put a lot of time, effort, and thought into the formulation.


    Kirk - www.keyesphoto.com
    Darn, I looked for my message to you on this because I wanted to post it here instead of writing it all over again. But alas, I suffer from an acute lack of computer organization.

    Which is one of the major reasons that I will always prefer film technology to digital!!

    Hey, you folks who think I am too digital, did you hear that?

    Sandy

  5. #95
    MurrayMinchin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Coast, BC, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,196
    Images
    15
    EEEEE-FREAKING-GAD...but doesn't this thread have legs?!?!?!

    I've just read the last couple pages and I think we should all get a tatoo of Steve's "Real Photographs Are Born Wet!" somewhere on our bodies...whadayathink? Then again, maybe that should be the APUG moto

    OK...now I'll go back to post #1...

    Murray

  6. #96
    MurrayMinchin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Coast, BC, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,196
    Images
    15
    Couldn't do it...couldn't read them all...too tired...too many guys trying to piss further than the other guy...I'll stick with SLIMT

    Murray

  7. #97
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    Magic, I do apologize to you and to Sandy, if the tone of my last post comes across as at all condescending in Sandy's direction, it was not my intent. There was a certain tounge-in-cheek approach aimed at the contention that no "individual" on the list has the experience or time to devote to developer research and come up with a superior product. Also, a certain allusion to the time spent in research by some, which P.E.'s post did nail quite cleanly (if not in the direction he intended) was intended on my part. I only hope the "Tar Baby" found it refreshing and poignant, as was my intention. Is that obtuse enough, or should I muddy the waters a bit more?

    I would hope that Sandy understands that I have the utmost admiration and respect for him. His research, knowledge in the "real world" of photography and ability to convey this information, free of charge, to any and all with an interest in photography is refreshing. I would only hope that at some time he might make a small amount of income from some of his work, but I suspect he might not really be too interested. If not that, perhaps an award by some group, organization or peer achievement would be in order. Too bad I don't know of a suitable venue in which to nominate him.

    Sean, how about an "APUG award of the year" for contributions to the community? I nominate Sandy. tim

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin