Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hoskinson

1) Preparation of this article has shown me that pyro does indeed produce less-visible grain and greater edge sharpness,

2) The fact that famous photographer A used pyro and made remarkable photographs is not a reason for choosing pyro.
1) In my experience, this is self contradictory. Pyrogallol based developers with no metol produce dramatically sharper negatives precisely through the mechanism whereby grain visibility is actually enhanced. In other words, the penalty one pays for greater edge sharpness (acutance) is more grain. This is virtually a proverb among those of us on APUG who have used ABC pyro extensively. By the same token, in a Pyro-Metol-Kodalk (PMK) formula, grain is masked by the exact mechanism which softens edge sharpness. The metol "smears" the silver halide crystals somewhat. You can't have it both ways.

2) I must agree. But, the fact that great photographers, famous or not, made remarkable photographs with pyro is a good reason for trying it. After they try it, most serious photographers seem to then find the good reasons for choosing it.