 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / October 2004B&W film question
My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What film would you recommend as a substitute? Thanks Gary >My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up >again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What >film would you recommend as a substitute? What formats are you shooting ? IT-Max 100 (TMX)is available in a broad range of formats and is an excellent film to start with. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Please remove the "_" when replying via email Oops... 35mm > >My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > >again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org > Please remove the "_" when replying via email >> >My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up >> >again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Oops... 35mm I would recommend using both of the T-Max films from Kodak. TMX-100 is one of the finest-grained and sharpest films made for pictorial use. Rate at EI50 and develop in D-23 1:1, 10 minutes at 70F for extremely fine grain. I was amazed at the resulting image. I use a Micromega focusing aid and the grain is so fine that I had trouble focusing on it. T-Max 400 (TMY) is another excellent film. It responds well to both pushing and pulling and is IMO one of the most versatile films I've used. At EI200 it makes a good general purpose film. If you don't compound your own developers, I suggest Microdol-X or D-76 as a developer. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Please remove the "_" when replying via email > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What > film would you recommend as a substitute? There are three reasonably viable choices (disclaimer: I haven't used any of these myself; I shoot ISO 400 almost exclusively). First is Efke 25. It's the same speed you're used to, but you'll find the grain somewhat less fine than Pan-X, and it's got a "funny" color response; red sensitivity is low enough it's referred to as "orthopanchromatic" -- red and green objects that meter as the same brightness will record with the red significantly darker on this film. It also has a very soft emulsion, more prone to scratching when wet than most, and could benefit from use of a hardener. Second choice is Ilford Pan F+ -- if you can still find any. IIRC, it's on the list of products being axed in the reorganization at Ilford, intended to try to keep the company operating instead of broken up and sold off, doors closed forever. It's ISO 50, originally created to compete with Pan-X, and very similar in many respects (but one stop faster). If you used to develop your Pan-X in Microdol-X (which, BTW, you can still get), the same treatment on Pan F+ will give very similar results. If you like this, stock up; it probably won't be obtainable this time next year. Third choice, and best (IMO), is Kodak T-Max 100. This film has a deserved reputation for being unforgiving, but so did Pan-X; you must expose correctly and not overdevelop, or the contrast will run away. Unlike Pan-X, however, TMX won't block highlights; you'll see detail in the negative, but at densities you can't print while preserving shadow details without resorting to all sorts of darkroom trickery ranging from split filtering and dodging/burning up to prebleaching the print. Exposed at EI 50 and processed in Microdol-X, this film is Kodak's closest suggested replacement for the discontinuing Tech Pan, and should be a fine successor to Pan-X if you take the time to learn to get along with it. This film should be around a while, since it's one of Kodak's better selling B&W materials and Kodak is still milking the cash cow of film, trying to prop up their unprofitable digital business. Another option is Fuji Neopan 100 and Acros 100 -- Neopan 100 is cubic grain, Acros is epitaxial (more like Ilford Delta than Kodak T-Max). I've shot one roll of Acros in 120, and while it produced nice negatives, I still prefer ISO 400. I know little about these films, they get few comments in the places I read. Long shot contender: Lucky 100, also sold as J & C Photography's Pro-100. This is one of the least expensive B&W materials around, and incorporates licensed Kodak technology (Lucky is produced in China, but Kodak owns part of the company and is reputed to have sold them machinery as well as licensed technology). Although a traditional cubic grain emulsion, it's said to incorporate some other qualities similar to TMX, and like most ISO 100 traditional emulsions, is said to be forgiving in comparison to TMX. It might produce negatives you like in Microdol-X, and it's certainly cheap enough to test.  SignatureI may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz! -- E. J. Fudd, 1954 Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. > > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > details without resorting to all sorts of darkroom trickery ranging from > split filtering and dodging/burning up to prebleaching the print. Simply amazing. Not having actually used/tested any of these films your knowledge is simply amazing. I have never found Tmax to be "unforgiving," at least no more/less than any other film when it comes to proper exposure (E.I.) Though it's true the film doesn't shoulder off. Course, I've only been shooting it for 10 years so what do I know... > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What > film would you recommend as a substitute? > > Thanks > Gary Several good choices: Ilford Pan-F Plus, ISO 50. Try it in Paterson Acutol 1+19 for 8 minutes @ 20C/68F. Fotokemika KB 25 (same as the former Adox KB14). Very contrasty. Try it in Paterson Acutol 1+22 for 7,5 minutes @ 20C/68F. Ilford Delta 100. Try it in Paterson FX-39 1+19 for 7,5 minutes @ 20C/68F. This would be my choice. Kodak T-Max 100 is also supposed to be good, but I don't like it. : > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up : > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What : > film would you recommend as a substitute? : > : > Thanks : > Gary : Several good choices: : Ilford Pan-F Plus, ISO 50. Try it in Paterson Acutol 1+19 for 8 : minutes @ 20C/68F. A very good film but with the financial<SP?> issues that Ilford is having it may not last long even if Ilford survives. : Fotokemika KB 25 (same as the former Adox KB14). Very contrasty. Try : it in Paterson Acutol 1+22 for 7,5 minutes @ 20C/68F. I've met people that like it a lot but have never had any luck with it. : Ilford Delta 100. Try it in Paterson FX-39 1+19 for 7,5 minutes @ : 20C/68F. This would be my choice. I spent a lot of time using Delta-100 this spring and like it a lot. I developed it with Iloford's DDX developer diluted 1:9 at 75F. Great tonality very good shadow detail and highlights that didn't block up. : Kodak T-Max 100 is also supposed to be good, but I don't like it. My personal opinion of Tmax-100 is that it's finest B&W film on the market. For sheet film I develop it with Tmax-RS at 75F diluted 1:9 and for roll film I develop it with Tmax at 75F diluted 1:9. I know a couple of people that use Bergger film developed in Pyro. I've seen the prints they make from it and they're excellent. I've seen 11x14 prints made from 35mm Bergger developed in Pyro and my first thought was that it was grainy 4x5 or very good 6x4.5. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com I told you I'd be watching you. Couldn't help yourself, could you? >: > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up >: > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >35mm Bergger developed in Pyro and my first thought was that it was grainy 4x5 or >very good 6x4.5. Robert Vervoordt, MFA : I told you I'd be watching you. Couldn't help yourself, could you? I thank you for it. :-) I've been thinking about what it is that we're trying to accomplish. I don't believe that the goal is to get rid of him. I think that it's an attempt to change his behavior. The best way to do that is to reward him when he behaves himself and to punish him when he misbehaves. I was simply rewarding him for his good behavior. Of course he reacts by starting a troll thread about typewriters. : >: > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up : >: > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] : >35mm Bergger developed in Pyro and my first thought was that it was grainy 4x5 or : >very good 6x4.5. : Robert Vervoordt, MFA SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > : I told you I'd be watching you. Couldn't help yourself, could you? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Of course he reacts by starting a troll thread about typewriters. Oh just killfile the clown already..... You realize that all the talk about the troll, is just as much crap as the postings of the troll. The best solution for trolls, is to killfile them and ignore them. The problem is that posters do not seem to want to ignore the troll, so we keep getting trolled. W > Oh just killfile the clown already..... > > You realize that all the talk about the troll, is just as much crap as > the postings of the troll. The best solution for trolls, is to killfile > them and ignore them. The problem is that posters do not seem to want > to ignore the troll, so we keep getting trolled. Its like idiots that wave a biscuit in front of a dog,...only to pull it from the dogs mouth at the last minute.....then they cry when the dog bites them. SignatureLF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 > Its like idiots that wave a biscuit in front of a dog,...only to >pull it from the dogs mouth at the last minute.....then they cry >when the dog bites them. Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Please remove the "_" when replying via email >> Its like idiots that wave a biscuit in front of a dog,...only to >>pull it from the dogs mouth at the last minute.....then they cry >>when the dog bites them. > > Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. Well a thumb, forcefully jammed in under the togue is effective. It works with young dogs very well . This one is an old dog, so it might not be effective. Can you afford to spare a thumb? >Regards, > > John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org > Please remove the "_" when replying via email Robert Vervoordt, MFA >> Its like idiots that wave a biscuit in front of a dog,...only to >>pull it from the dogs mouth at the last minute.....then they cry >>when the dog bites them. > > Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. That, I'm afraid, depends on the dog. A pit bull will just learn to bite faster and harder... SignatureI may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz! -- E. J. Fudd, 1954 Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. >> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. > > That, I'm afraid, depends on the dog. A pit bull will just learn to bite > faster and harder... A pitbull-like dog responds very well to a .45ACP behind the ear. Once. : >> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. : > : > That, I'm afraid, depends on the dog. A pit bull will just learn to bite : > faster and harder... : A pitbull-like dog responds very well to a .45ACP behind the ear. Once. I've known people that have had and others that have pitbulls and they are by nature the sweetest and friendliest dogs I've ever known. Of course the ones I've known weren't attack trained. To blame an attack trained dog to do what it was trained is a lot like blaming the gun when a person gets shot. SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com >: >> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. >: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >To blame an attack trained dog to do what it was trained is a lot like blaming the gun >when a person gets shot. Right on. I once saw a lapdog Doberman. Go figure. Still, it comes down to what are we doing about the nameless one? Frank, is the reward for your nice behavior enough? Robert Vervoordt, MFA >Right on. I once saw a lapdog Doberman. Go figure. My aunt had a Dobey. Cute pup. They lived in the country. Dog was never attack trained. One day it turned on her and she ran into the trailer to call my uncle home. He arrived to find the dog gone berserk and trying to get in the trailer. 38 put the dog out of its misery. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Vote "No! for the status quo. Vote 3rd party !! > >: >> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. > >: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >the sweetest and friendliest dogs I've ever known. Of course the ones I've known weren't > >attack trained. Attack trained has nothing to do with it. These are aggressive breeds. They follow instinct that is ages old and it cannot be "trained" out of them. Even your waggy-tailed mixed mut that loves your kids will behave as an "aatack" dog under the right circumstances. But pit bull type breeds are born to it and far more natuirally aggressive. > >To blame an attack trained dog to do what it was trained is a lot like blaming the gun > >when a person gets shot. The dogs should be outlawed and the owners put in jail. Like the lady who just got 6 years when her pit bulls (3 of them) attacked and killed a local woman here in CO. I see a pit bull in my neighborhood it's shoot first and save a child's life... > Right on. I once saw a lapdog Doberman. Go figure. Doberman's aren't nearly as aggressive as pit bulls, though. > Still, it comes down to what are we doing about the nameless one? > Frank, is the reward for your nice behavior enough? > > Robert Vervoordt, MFA > : >> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. > : > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > To blame an attack trained dog to do what it was trained is a lot like blaming the gun > when a person gets shot. There was just a huge off-topic discussion of this on rec.woodworking. Yes, the discussion didn't belong there any more than it belongs here. Nonetheless, it's already been done there. You'll find plenty of statistics, anecdotal experiences and references. I suggest that those interested in such a discussion check that out if they wish. -Peter De smidt >> : "Donald Qualls" <silent1@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message : >> news:4Iubd.24719$n%3.3766305@twister.southeast.rr.com... [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > statistics, anecdotal experiences and references. I suggest that those > interested in such a discussion check that out if they wish. Folks, I would agree with Peter on this one, unless the dog is trained to process and print (or scan) film for ya, it's really OT for this group and the thread should get dropped...... W > > : >> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. > > : > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > There was just a huge off-topic discussion of this on rec.woodworking. > Yes, the discussion didn't belong there any more than it belongs here. Yes but it's 2 am and I'm out of my standard grade 2 paper and bored... > Nonetheless, it's already been done there. You'll find plenty of > statistics, anecdotal experiences and references. I suggest that those > interested in such a discussion check that out if they wish. O c'mon. wander OT a little :-) > : >> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. > : > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > To blame an attack trained dog to do what it was trained is a lot like blaming the gun > when a person gets shot. Actually, the pit bulls I've known weren't trained, which was the problem -- their natural defensive and agressive tendencies were never tempered with the discipline to know when *not* to be agressive. It's that which makes a dangerous dog, not attack training; an attack trained don't won't attack without command (or at least a "watch" command followed by an event the dog interprets as agression), but an untrained dog will attack because he think's you're a threat, or to establish dominance, or just because he doesn't like your atttitude. Personally, I don't like dogs much anyway, but I'd really rather not deal with a 90-100 lb dog bred for fighting, but which has received as its only training a few months of "hang the dog by his teeth" play without any tempering to human command. You can't imagine how glad I am to no longer live next door to the neighbor who was treating his pit bull pup this way, because I could clearly see a day when I'd have to either shoot the animal, or let it chew me up, kill my cats, etc. IMO, anyone who owns a dog that attacks and injures a human should be charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon, and the animal treated like a weapon used in a violent crime: held as evidence, then destroyed. This only because there are serious problems with putting down both dog and owner at the time and scene of the attack... SignatureI may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz! -- E. J. Fudd, 1954 Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. > Actually, the pit bulls I've known weren't trained, which was the problem > [...] Right. Anyone who thinks that all dogs are born a blank slate is fooling himself. Dogs of specific breeds _are born with specific tendencies_. Pitbulls bite and hold on. That's what they do. Other dogs bite and slash and bite again. Some dogs are born guard dogs (livestock guardians, especially), some dogs are useless annoyances from the cradle to the grave. Standard Poodles are probably smarter than the average Usenet poster. Things like that. > an attack trained dog won't attack without command (or at least a "watch" > command followed by an event the dog interprets as agression), but an > untrained dog will attack because he think's you're a threat, or to > establish dominance, or just because he doesn't like your atttitude. Interesting, and it squares with what we've been learning about training our puppy. In order to teach him *not* to do a particular behavior, he first has to be given the *concept* of that behavior - by being taught to do it on command. This also works with toddlers... > Interesting, and it squares with what we've been learning about training our > puppy. In order to teach him *not* to do a particular behavior, he first > has to be given the *concept* of that behavior - by being taught to do it on > command. Ah so you tech them to s*** on my front lawn on command...* > This also works with toddlers... I don't even what to know. *Actually its mostly cats and infrequent, but on cat turd seems to arract more. Signaturepete@petezilla.co.uk http://www.petezilla.co.uk >> Interesting, and it squares with what we've been learning about training >> our [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Ah so you tech them to s*** on my front lawn on command...* Once there was this new suburb that surrounded an old farmhouse, and every night several of the neighbors would let their dogs loose to s*t all over the neighborhood, leaving piles of crap everywhere in the morning. Everywhere except around the old farmhouse. One night a neighbor was walking by and saw the old man walking around his yard applying something from an eyedropper on the piles left in his yard. He asked the old man, "What's that stuff that makes it go away so quick?" The old man replied, "Bacon Grease". >> Ah so you tech them to s*** on my front lawn on command...* > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >eyedropper on the piles left in his yard. He asked the old man, "What's that >stuff that makes it go away so quick?" The old man replied, "Bacon Grease". We had a similar problem when I was a kid. My dad would put out some ground beef each morning, laced with EX-LAX. Dogs would eat it, then go back home, and leave a mess in the house. Before long, the dogs were not allowed out unsupervised. >>>Ah so you tech them to s*** on my front lawn on command...* >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > go back home, and leave a mess in the house. Before long, the dogs > were not allowed out unsupervised. A former roommate of mine went a step harsher than that -- he had dogs getting into his garbage (in an area with a leash law), and the owners either wouldn't believe it was their dogs, or denied it. He divided up a full spray can of insecticide on a couple steaks and put them in the garbage. Don't recall him ever complaining about dogs in the cans again... SignatureThe challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions. -- Ansel Adams Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. In my state we have severe penalties for cruelty to animals. There's a difference between eliminating a dangerous animal and sadism... > A former roommate of mine went a step harsher than that -- he had dogs > getting into his garbage (in an area with a leash law), and the owners > either wouldn't believe it was their dogs, or denied it. He divided up > a full spray can of insecticide on a couple steaks and put them in the > garbage. Don't recall him ever complaining about dogs in the cans again... > In my state we have severe penalties for cruelty to animals. > There's a difference between eliminating a dangerous animal [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>a full spray can of insecticide on a couple steaks and put them in the >>garbage. Don't recall him ever complaining about dogs in the cans again... There are similar penalties in Idaho (where this took place) as well. One would have a hard time making much of a case from this incident, though, as it would require a complaint from dog owners who would, as part of the complaint for what amounts to a property crime (destruction of an animal), have to admit to violating the leash law in letting their dogs run loose; it would be on a par with calling the police to report theft of illegal drugs. In addition, insecticides (a commercial household product, in this case, though I don't recall the ingredients) mostly operate by disrupting nervous function causing numbness and paralysis; far from a cruel way to die compared to vacuum suffocation, which is commonly used to eliminate "excess" animals at shelters and pounds. Making a case for cruelty would have been pretty far fetched, even if the owners had any idea why the dogs got sick. Nor, for that matter, did I say I condoned his action -- there were good reasons he was a "former" roommate, and gross stupidity was high on the list; this wasn't the first time he bragged to me of doing something illegal and dangerous. SignatureThe challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions. -- Ansel Adams Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. > > In my state we have severe penalties for cruelty to animals. > > There's a difference between eliminating a dangerous animal [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > dogs run loose; it would be on a par with calling the police to report > theft of illegal drugs. Violation of leash laws is hardly on "par with calling the police to report theft of illegal drugs." Your reasoning doesn't appear cogent. Cruelty to animal laws have nothing to do with destruction of property. They have to do with (human) cruelty to another living creature. The fact that the animal may also be property isn't relevant. > In addition, insecticides (a commercial > household product, in this case, though I don't recall the ingredients) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pounds. Making a case for cruelty would have been pretty far fetched, > even if the owners had any idea why the dogs got sick. Again, you seem to lack proper perspective. The "cruelty" isn't in the suffering. It's human caused harm, i.e., it isn't about the animal it's about the cruel and illegal act of the perpetrator, whether through deliberate sadism, negligence, or indifference. > Nor, for that matter, did I say I condoned his action -- there were good > reasons he was a "former" roommate, and gross stupidity was high on the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth > and don't expect them to be perfect. > Again, you seem to lack proper perspective. The "cruelty" isn't > in the suffering. It's human caused harm, i.e., it isn't about > the animal it's about the cruel and illegal act of the perpetrator, > whether through deliberate sadism, negligence, or indifference. Uh-oh. I try never to argue with bleeding-heart liberals. Bye. SignatureThe challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions. -- Ansel Adams Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. > > Again, you seem to lack proper perspective. The "cruelty" isn't > > in the suffering. It's human caused harm, i.e., it isn't about > > the animal it's about the cruel and illegal act of the perpetrator, > > whether through deliberate sadism, negligence, or indifference. > > Uh-oh. I try never to argue with bleeding-heart liberals. Bye. It's how the law is contextually written and applied, stupid, not my personal interpretation. It's not about property; it's about the criminal action of human beings (i.e., most murders start out by torturing animals. ) Get it? And in my state it was written by conservatives... >>>Again, you seem to lack proper perspective. The "cruelty" isn't >>>in the suffering. It's human caused harm, i.e., it isn't about [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > And in my state it was written by conservatives... I had typed a reply, but I deleted it. Suffice to say, regardless who wrote the law, you're interpreting it as a bleeding heart. SignatureThe challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions. -- Ansel Adams Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. >>>>Again, you seem to lack proper perspective. The "cruelty" isn't >>>>in the suffering. It's human caused harm, i.e., it isn't about [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >I had typed a reply, but I deleted it. Suffice to say, regardless who >wrote the law, you're interpreting it as a bleeding heart. No, these laws came from a Conservative tradition of attempting to maintain societal health. these days, most of my Conservative friends rush from any discussion of Bush's torture of animals as a young fellow. They hate to be presented with something that goes against their morals and puts them in conflict with their reflexive political choice. Sadly, both Liberals and Conservatives are shirking their duty to think about heir political actions and alignments. The only group in which I found even a smidgeon more willingness to think was the Progressives. They were mostly for Kucinich, but given their strong individualistic bent, even he was subject to criticism. You can run, but you can't hide. The inescapable facts of life are change and interdependency. How you handle it is your choice. Robert Vervoordt, MFA > >>>>Again, you seem to lack proper perspective. The "cruelty" isn't > >>>>in the suffering. It's human caused harm, i.e., it isn't about [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > No, these laws came from a Conservative tradition of attempting to > maintain societal health. Forget it, Robert. Donald feels free to call other people's arguments "irrational," but when he makes an utterly stupid statement from his ignorant knowledge base, he can only name call. The laws in my state were in fact designed to address the concerns of the torture of animals as a steping stone to more heinous crimes against humanity. People who have a history of animal cruelty are typically those who commit sadistic crimes against human beings. Our rather right wing legilsature recognized this and its the basis of our law. Perpetrators are given stiff sentences, and I agree with it. So go ahead, Don, say something else transparently stupid. The only thing you constantly demonstrate is your ignorance... > these days, most of my Conservative friends rush from any discussion > of Bush's torture of animals as a young fellow. They hate to be [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Robert Vervoordt, MFA >In my state we have severe penalties for cruelty to animals. >There's a difference between eliminating a dangerous animal >and sadism... How about cruelty to managers ? I'll never forget that time we took a Mac screenshot and put it on one managers Win2K system ! Took him hours to figure out that all he had to do was reboot the system ! Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Vote "No! for the status quo. Vote 3rd party !! > >In my state we have severe penalties for cruelty to animals. > >There's a difference between eliminating a dangerous animal [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > took a Mac screenshot and put it on one managers Win2K system ! Took > him hours to figure out that all he had to do was reboot the system ! Well, there's _supposed_ to be a difference in intellect between man and lower animals... >: A pitbull-like dog responds very well to a .45ACP behind the ear. Once. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >To blame an attack trained dog to do what it was trained is a lot like blaming the gun >when a person gets shot. Sorry Frank but they were bred for it. It's really that simple. Can they be trained to be obedient ? Sure. I suggest reviewing http://www.realpitbull.com/ownership.html But would I allow one on my property ? Only if he was bringing me part of George Bush ! Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Vote "No! for the status quo. Vote 3rd party !! > Sorry Frank but they were bred for it. It's really that > simple. Can they be trained to be obedient ? Sure. I suggest reviewing > http://www.realpitbull.com/ownership.html > But would I allow one on my property ? Only if he was bringing > me part of George Bush ! Now THAT is cruelty to animals! SignaturePaul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd., +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda. West Australia 6076 comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked. EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be. >>>Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. >> >>That, I'm afraid, depends on the dog. A pit bull will just learn to bite >>faster and harder... > > A pitbull-like dog responds very well to a .45ACP behind the ear. Once. True, though I personally prefer .357 Magnum. Strictly a matter of personal preference, though; either treatment will do the job with a single application. SignatureI may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz! -- E. J. Fudd, 1954 Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. >>> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. >> >> That, I'm afraid, depends on the dog. A pit bull will just learn to bite >> faster and harder... > >A pitbull-like dog responds very well to a .45ACP behind the ear. Once. Playing dead ? LOL !! We certainly agree. A home on our street was recently rented to someone with a pitbull. I have already advised my wife how to handle these brutes. 1 shot = 1 kill. My son is 3 and at just shy of 30 pounds wouldn't be much of a toy for one of those killers. My daughter of 1 even less so. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Please remove the "_" when replying via email >>>> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org > Please remove the "_" when replying via email oct1804 from Lloyd Erlick, Just this week they announced a province-wide ban on pit bulls in Ontario. Existing pets are permitted, but have strict new controls. Best news is they must be correctly muzzled when in public. It's way past due. There have been absolutely horrible attacks for years. You'd have to have quite a high skill level to kill a pit bull with a hand gun. And you'd have to be cool as the proverbial cucumber to do it while it was dancing around with your toddler. Home protection sidearms aren't the answer, because dogs are high speed, surprise attackers, from behind if possible. What I've never understood is the communities that tolerate dog attacks. Over all the years they've been happening in my city, I wonder why no victim or relative has taken vigilante revenge later on the idiot owner? We really are a soft society, permissive in all the wrong places. >>>> Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org > Please remove the "_" when replying via email oct1804 from Lloyd Erlick, Just this week they announced a province-wide ban on pit bulls in Ontario. Existing pets are permitted, but have strict new controls. Best news is they must be correctly muzzled when in public. It's way past due. There have been absolutely horrible attacks for years. You'd have to have quite a high skill level to kill a pit bull with a hand gun. And you'd have to be cool as the proverbial cucumber to do it while it was dancing around with your toddler. Home protection sidearms aren't the answer, because dogs are high speed, surprise attackers, from behind if possible. What I've never understood is the communities that tolerate dog attacks. Over all the years they've been happening in my city, I wonder why no victim or relative has taken vigilante revenge later on the idiot dog owner? We really are a soft society, permissive in all the wrong places. regards, --le Signature________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto. voice: 416-686-0326 email: portrait@heylloyd.com net: www.heylloyd.com ________________________________ > Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. True. Do it early. As one who until recently had a 185 pound Great Pyrenees livestock guardian... but I digress. > > Its like idiots that wave a biscuit in front of a dog,...only to > >pull it from the dogs mouth at the last minute.....then they cry > >when the dog bites them. > > Best way to teach a dog not to bite is to bite them first. now that's not compassionate conservatism at all ;-) Course like jj I'd probably prefer the quick and more humane .45, or in my case an S&W .357 >: I told you I'd be watching you. Couldn't help yourself, could you? > >I thank you for it. :-) I've been thinking about what it is that we're trying >to accomplish. I don't believe that the goal is to get rid of him. Perhaps not, but I'd take that if I couldn't get anything better. Hmm, is there anything better? >I think that >it's an attempt to change his behavior. The best way to do that is to reward him >when he behaves himself and to punish him when he misbehaves. I was simply rewarding >him for his good behavior. That's noble of you. Nobility should be recognized and rewarded. >Of course he reacts by starting a troll thread about typewriters. Some reward! Consistent, to say the least; I just did. >: >: > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up >: >: > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >: >35mm Bergger developed in Pyro and my first thought was that it was grainy 4x5 or >: >very good 6x4.5. Robert Vervoordt, MFA : >: I told you I'd be watching you. Couldn't help yourself, could you? : > : >I thank you for it. :-) I've been thinking about what it is that we're trying : >to accomplish. I don't believe that the goal is to get rid of him. : Perhaps not, but I'd take that if I couldn't get anything better. That should be the last resort. : Hmm, is there anything better? Having Scarpitti a well behaved contributor to the newsgroup. While I don't agree with most of what scarpitti has to say about much of anything I do know for example people that don't care for the Zone System and are quick to say so. Although the two of us have "debated" the use and effectiveness" of the Zone System he's never called me a nazi or moron. Although I can't understand why there are people here on this newsgroup and people I personally know that not only disagree with me that Tmax-100 is the finest film on the market. A number of them actually think the film stinks. Although we've discussed(?) it we've never got to the point of insulting each other. As you may have noticed I enjoy a good debate (The operative word being "good".) and don't think that we all have agree. I for one have learned a lot from a number of the debates I've been involved in here. : >I think that : >it's an attempt to change his behavior. The best way to do that is to reward him : >when he behaves himself and to punish him when he misbehaves. I was simply rewarding : >him for his good behavior. : That's noble of you. Nobility should be recognized and rewarded. The prefered reward method is large amounts of cash sent to me in small bills. :-) : >Of course he reacts by starting a troll thread about typewriters. : Some reward! Consistent, to say the least; I just did. He's getting better. : >: >: > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up : >: >: > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] : >: >35mm Bergger developed in Pyro and my first thought was that it was grainy 4x5 or : >: >very good 6x4.5. : Robert Vervoordt, MFA SignatureKeep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- fwp@deepthought.com > : I told you I'd be watching you. Couldn't help yourself, could you? > > I thank you for it. :-) I've been thinking about what it is that we're trying > to accomplish. I don't believe that the goal is to get rid of him. I think that > it's an attempt to change his behavior. Do not cast your pearls before swine... A wise man once said that. >>: I told you I'd be watching you. Couldn't help yourself, could you? >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > A wise man once said that. Yeah, Jesus Christ said it, during the Sermon on the Mount. Matthew 7:6 (KJV) Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. Not my favourite translation, because I think something as important as the word of God, shouldn't need to be rendered in Shakespearian English. A more modern translation, the World English Bible which says the same thing in a more modern vernacular says the same verse as: Don’t give that which is holy to the dogs, neither throw your pearls before the pigs, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces. W > : > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > : > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > 35mm Bergger developed in Pyro and my first thought was that it was grainy 4x5 or > very good 6x4.5. New photos are up. http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/ILFOPRO/MemberPhoto.asp?ID=1274 http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/ILFOPRO/MemberPhoto.asp?ID=1273 http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/ILFOPRO/MemberPhoto.asp?ID=1272 http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/ILFOPRO/MemberGallery.asp?membername=Micha el+Scarpitti > : > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > : > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > My personal opinion of Tmax-100 is that it's finest B&W film on the market. Yes well film choices are increasing limited so that's not saying much... Hands down Tech Pan was a much better film. Ah, per?! Reany ha scritto due cosette forse interessanti... > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What > film would you recommend as a substitute? > > Thanks > Gary try Neopan Acros 100 or Neopan 400. The first is better fine grained than every tmax and has a *classic* silver performance under the enlarger. Smooth grays but will do everything you want. No reciprocity effect until 120sec. so is gorgeous in nightshots. I use most the times when i need a superlative 100 iso. Neopan 400: grained as a tmax 100 but more more usable and reliable. Excellent in every way. Just to try and you will fall in love . Ilford PAN F for slow speed. Excellent grays, contrast is easily controllable by developing, nice and sharp grain. When printed is amazing. Ciao!! (I absolutely prefer neopans...) SignatureNon ? bello cio che ? bello figuriamoci cio che ? brutto! > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What > film would you recommend as a substitute? Ilford Pan F Plus is the nearest actual equivalent. Kodak T-Max 100 is Kodak's replacement. Try it -- it's good! > My darkroom has been packed away for many years. I'm setting it back up > again and I want advice on film. I used to use Kodak panatomic-x. What > film would you recommend as a substitute? > > Thanks > Gary Sadly, none! There are no current films that substitute for those old emulsions. Tonality is not as rich as the old ones but they are sharper. J. > Sadly, none! There are no current films that substitute for those old > emulsions. Tonality is not as rich as the old ones but they are > sharper. Is the new PLus-X that much different than the old Plus-X? While I loved Pan-X, I always thought that the tonality of Plus-X was pretty good too. Also my favorite, Adox KB-14 still lives on as EFKE-KB25. Is it that much different? My experience with TMAX and Edwal FG-7 when TMAX first came out was that you could get a pretty good negative out of it too. Of course FG-7 was unique, it would get a good negative out of almost anything. Geoff. SignatureGeoffrey S. Mendelson, C.T.O. GW&T Ltd., Jerusalem Israel gsm@mendelson.com gsm@gwandt.com IL Voice: 972-544-608-069 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 > > Sadly, none! There are no current films that substitute for those old > > emulsions. Tonality is not as rich as the old ones but they are [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Geoff. I don´t know; I never liked Plus-X. My standard film was Verichrome Pan which in my opinion, was markedly better than Plus-X (FP4 plus, Pan F plus, Tmax, or Delta) in terms of tonality. I have experiece with Adox or EFKE but I think they are thick emulsions like those of Forte (which is great-except for the resolution.) Also I believe HP5 to be the best film still available. I don't think Kodak has anything to offer regarding B&W films. All Ilford films are better. J. >> > Sadly, none! There are no current films that substitute for those old >> > emulsions. Tonality is not as rich as the old ones but they are [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >Pan which in my opinion, was markedly better than Plus-X (FP4 plus, >Pan F plus, Tmax, or Delta) in terms of tonality. Hmm. At one time there was a Plus-X version that mached Verichrome Pan for tonal gradation. It was avilable in long rolls and, perhaps, was the MP version of Plus-X, with which I only had a brief encounter. I do remember that the MP version was giving results a bit off from the still version, but not enough for me to pin it down. Have you looked into this? >I have experiece with Adox or EFKE but I think they are thick >emulsions like those of Forte (which is great-except for the >resolution.) > >Also I believe HP5 to be the best film still available. So do I. It might be the closest exixting film to Ansco Super Hypan/GAF 500 that can be found. I loved the rendition of tones when there was no "pushing": it was not a very pushable film in any case. The short toe is what gave it notable shadow contrast and full blacks in unmanipulated printing. I had to work too much with Tri-X/DoubleX to really like these films. >I don't think >Kodak has anything to offer regarding B&W films. All Ilford films are >better. Not in all regards, but they are quite good. Robert Vervoordt, MFA > >> > Sadly, none! There are no current films that substitute for those old > >> > emulsions. Tonality is not as rich as the old ones but they are [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > still version, but not enough for me to pin it down. Have you looked > into this? PLus-X did in fact used to be a film I used for it's outstanding tonal rendition. Haven't used it since it was reengineered some years ago and it no longer comes (thanks, idiot Kodak CEOs...) in sheet film. > >I have experiece with Adox or EFKE but I think they are thick > >emulsions like those of Forte (which is great-except for the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Robert Vervoordt, MFA |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.