Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,817   Posts: 1,581,640   Online: 769
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by df cardwell View Post
    Bob

    This is an authentic Canadian Formula of Kodak's D-52.
    It is similar to Dektol, but has a different balance of metol and HQ , for a more useful contrast.

    I've only used it for 40 years, but it shows promise.

    It does everything Dektol will do, but you won't have to use the 2x4.
    Don't tell Les.

    PM me for how you can easily use Bromide as a control.

    Interesting how Kodak Canada was offering metric equivalents as early as 1926!
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  2. #32
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,918
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    Interesting how Kodak Canada was offering metric equivalents as early as 1926!
    And describing the alternative as "avoirdupois" .

    Matt

  3. #33
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    And describing the alternative as "avoirdupois" .

    Matt
    Because that's the correct name for the system. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoirdupois

    The British and US systems vary because the British included the "stone" unit and wanted to make larger units easily divisible by 14, which is what the "stone" mass equals in pounds.

    The greek drachma was the equivalent to the avoirdupois "dram".

    Lee

  4. #34
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,918
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee L View Post
    Because that's the correct name for the system. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoirdupois

    The British and US systems vary because the British included the "stone" unit and wanted to make larger units easily divisible by 14, which is what the "stone" mass equals in pounds.

    The greek drachma was the equivalent to the avoirdupois "dram".

    Lee
    I know that to be true Lee, but it is so rare to actually see "avoirdupois" used, I had to comment on the Canadian correctness of it all!

    Matt

  5. #35
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    I know that to be true Lee, but it is so rare to actually see "avoirdupois" used, I had to comment on the Canadian correctness of it all!

    Matt
    Got it. I see it all the time on my uncle's 1930's Pelouze balance that I've used for 40 years for my darkroom weight measurements, so I guess I'm overly accustomed to it. FWIW, I have some US photo chemical company books from the 1930's that also have two columns for many formulae, one for avoirdupois and one for metric.

    Lee

  6. #36
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,426
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    Interesting how Kodak Canada was offering metric equivalents as early as 1926!
    Well I have Eastman Kodak Formulae from around 1912 and possibly earlier that are listed as metric as well a avoirdupois from the outset. Ron (PE) raises the issue of the Photo Lab Index/Photo Almanac's etc problems, many conversions between anhydrous and mono-hyrdated/crystalline forms of sulphites/carbonates were incorrect, as well as metric/avoirdupois conversions. The only reasonably reliable sources are the original manufacturers publications, even these have the odd error but these are few and far between.

    Ian
    Last edited by Ian Grant; 01-28-2009 at 04:05 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #37
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee L View Post
    Because that's the correct name for the system. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoirdupois

    The British and US systems vary because the British included the "stone" unit and wanted to make larger units easily divisible by 14, which is what the "stone" mass equals in pounds.

    The greek drachma was the equivalent to the avoirdupois "dram".

    Lee
    There is also a major difference in liquid measure, A US Gallon is 3.85L, a British Gallon is 4.5L, so if you require 5 grains of something per gallon, then you need to know which gallon.
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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