Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hoskinson
Jorge, IMHO, YES! That is the way science is supposed to work. Honest, sincere debate and critical review of the experimental results are fundamental parts of the process. I am only unhappy when the results are a useless dead-end.
I agree Tom, but in science we at least have a set amount of procedures where we all agree give the correct data, here not even that is agreed.

I for one fail to see why someone will try a compare staining negatives and use VC paper. I said it before and say it again, the paper should be a fixed parameter so that the color of the stain does not play any role other than density properties. Once again we see Bond using VC paper. What comes next? Another article named "Pyro and graded paper" to make up for the mistake done here?

You know what, I would be more interested on article that defines the parameters and the appropriate measurement procedures, at least this way we can all start from square one in agreement. Seems to me everybody does the testing their own way, and as such, nothing is ever clarified. Look at the last 3 months, VC and CA had their test, PT had 2 tests, and yet....no definite findings one way or another....it is really becoming tiresome, at the same time this thread is going, there is another about the same thing in the LF forum with a complete opposite opinion than yours. Who are we to beleive?

Really, Pyro is becoming another putrfact dead horse we keep beating on, and on, and on......