Ken Archer wrote:
> This technique has been around
>at least 40 years that I know about.
What worked 40 years ago may not work as well on contemporary
films, or have any benefit when compared to some of the current
developers and other developing techniques.
> Let me give you a little theory behind it.
I understand the theory behind it, and believe that other
techniques and contemporary developer/film combinations make
this a useless exercise. My question was: "What's the advantage
of your technique?" So while everyone's busy explaining how it
works, no one has shown any advantage to using the technique
with the films and chemistry that we have today. For example,
in what way is this better than a two-bath developer? What
happens to the tonal scale when using this technique? Is this
technique any better than using minimal agitation, such as
advocated by Crawley in the '60s?
> Highlight areas require much more
> developer than the shadow areas. When you first put the film in the developer,
> it soaks up an equal amount throughout the emulsion. If you took the film out
> of the developer at that moment, the highlight area would quickly exhaust its
> developer and stop develpment while the shadow area would continue merrily
> along as it uses much less developer by comparison. This technique is very
> effective at avoiding blocked highlights while opening up the shadows. As with
> any technique, it is very repeatable if you are very exact in your timing and
> agitation.
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
