Because even if stable, it does not offer any significant advantages
over M-Q or P-Q formulations, and suffers from disadvantages.

Better oft ignoring the ignorant unwashed troll, Patrick. I think his
ancestor slept through the evolutionary step that brought most of the
rest of us human kind to the place that engendered common sense
and polite discourse.....ignore him and he will pucker up and blow away
like the sour old fruit he is.

That's a disadvantage, not an advantage....

Correct. Stop there.

I'm going to have to disagree about the lack of advantage for small format
users. I have a friend that uses pyro on 35mm. I've seen 11x14 prints that
he's made from those 35mm and there is no sign of grain and they have
great tonality.

 >

We will save that for your epitaph.

Actually, though, you are not.  To insult someone well, you have to avoid the
use of profanity.  A truly memorable insult requires imagination, timing and an
appreciation for the versatility of language.  Take Churchill for instance:  A
woman says, "Sir, you are drunk."  Churchill replied,  "Yes, Madame, I am drunk.
 And you are ugly.  And tomorrow, I will be sober, but you will still be ugly."
 I am sorry to inform you that having reviewed a more than sufficient number of
your insults, they do not reach this standard.  They lack the use of dichotomy
for instance and of balanced sentence structure.  There is no sense of timing.

Again, take Rostand, Act 1 of Cyrano de Bergerac, where Cyrano points out that
to call his nose ugly is a wholly inadequate insult, that the other could have
said a number of intelligent things instead, such as, "Your nose is so long that
birds could happily rest upon it."  You have failed to realize the potential of
literature as a source for insult, or the ability of the the mind to create
hyperbole.  I strongly commend to you a deep and varied reading of literature
before you again pretend to insult.  Language, my dear man, in all its
structural glory, alliteration, and assonance, not the repeated use of a limited
number of worn out words and phrases provides the proper vehicle for insult.
Your feeble attempts to shock are far too passè.  The world has long since
accustomed itself to these words.  As an example, I put forth for your
edification the play "The Gin Game" by D. L. Coburn (1978), wherein the use of
the word "f.ck" for shock value gradually loses its value for upsetting a
setuagenarian lady.

No, dear sir, the crass employment of monosyllabic words have no more shock
value than does seeing Warhol's Tomato Can picture for the 900th time.  It has
been done.  It once was new.  Now it is trite, as, alas, are those strings of
words you mistakingly deem insults.

Francis A. Miniter

1) Photography is not 'art' and cannot be 'art', and being 'art' would
not make photographs any more significant or important than their
content allows. 'Art' and photography are two different things, each
self-contained. They do not overlap. Photography would not be 'better'
if it were 'art'. Dogs would not be better if they were cats, either.

2) The growing reliance on discussion groups for basic information that
can be garnered from reading and study (you know, going to the library
and looking at BOOKS) is deplorable. That's where beginners should go.
Since so many lazy sh.ts ask questions on discussion groups that they
should either have the common sense to figure out for themselves or do
the research themsleves, I find it appropriate to 'smack them in the
head', metaphorically speaking. Knowledge of science has sunk to a new
low in this country (the US). I thought it could not get any worse, but
it has. Thus, we have people asking about mixing Rodinal with
Microdol-X in an attempt to gain the benefits of both. It is not
difficult to read up on Rodinal and learn that it uses a very strong
alkali, and that metol-based developers such as Microdol-X use a mild
alkali, and that this makes these two developers incompatible. I have
nothing but contempt for beginners who are so lazy that they cannot
figure out even the most elementary, basic principles of scinece, which
should be learned in high school at the latest. To such persons I show
nothing but contempt and derision.

I have explained the rationale for my behavior. You may disapprove, as
I expect you will. It's one thing to be ingnorant. It's quite another
to be stupid, to be so lazy that you cannot figure out anything for
yourself. No-one handed me the answers when I was learning. I devoured
books and magazines on photography, and experimented with all kinds of
products to see what they would do.

I earned my knowledge, and I am happy to share it with those who have
indicated in their posts some glimmer of intelligence. Using pyro in
this day and age is, however, the height of stupidity, given the number
and variety of developers of far superior quality, consistency, and
ease of use. The basics of roll film practice were perfected decades
ago. One need only glance through guidebooks by figures such as Andreas
Feininger, Alfred Eisestandt, Paul Wolff, or the Leica Manuals and
Kodak publications of the 1950's to realize that. One will see in such
publications examples of very high quality photographs accomplished
with relative ease.

There is too much reliance upon the rarther limited knowledge of Ansel
Adams, whose books waylay many a beginner.

Paul Wolff is FAR more important that Ansel Adams if you are interested
in learning about roll film B&W technique.

"Dr. Paul Wolff's influence on making the 35 mm camera popular can
hardly be overestimated: Thanks to his discovery of a developing
technique that solved the problem of coarse film grain, prints of
impressive sizes became possible. "Small negative - large print" had
finally become true. (For his merits, Wolff was given the Leica with
the serial number 200,000 by the factory.) Wolff wrote several books
with Leica photographs that he took on his extended journeys; the book
shown here, however, deals with the technical aspects of Leica
photography. In this second edition from 1939, colour photographs are
shown for the first time."

http://www.ozdoba.net/leica/leica_lit_e.html

http://www.getty.edu/art/collections/bio/a1497-1.html

Trevor; Your exactly the people we want continuing to post to
this group, by and large most of the people here are quality
and have been outstandingly helpful.

Although I (cough- can't speak for myself :-)

Keep in mind most of us, like forgetting the troll(s) exist
and do well at it for the most part.

    He knows his purpose. To get people to notice him.

JD - www.puresilver.org