Digital BW, The Print

Frank,

I have to say that I feel that Pyro development did more to improve my
printing than anything I did short of moving to up to 4x5. You couldn't get
me to go back to D-76 or HC110 for nothing.

D-76 and HC-110 also present heath risks and get NPFA Health ratings of 3
and 2 respectively. This is not to play down the risks of Pyro which is also
rated 3 (the scale starts at 0 being the safest).

I believe PMK is as cheap or cheaper than either D76 or HC110 on a one shot
basis.

But the most important thing is to be comfortable with your materials and
methods. Someone using their materials well will do a better job than anyone
else using the latest quick fix poorly.

Martin


----- Original Message -----
From: "culturalvisions" <fmward@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 12:43 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: PMK Pyro toxicity (7 truths)


> I used Pyro PMK for years with 8X10 sheet film and would often
> shoot two negatives of each image.  I would process one in Pyro
> and one in D-76 or HC110.  I could never tell the difference once
> I contact printed them.  I kept using the pyro anyway because I
> thought that Gordon Hutchins must be right even though I
> couldn't tell the difference.  Just like the emporer's new clothes,
> Now that I have returned to my old suit of clothes, I feel much
> more comfortable.
>
>    I jumped in on this discussion late, but I want to tell folks not to
> spend the money on such a toxic substance.  If you are using
> 35mm film, the only difference you'll see is that it is grainier.
>
> Frank
>
> http://www.culturalvisions.com
>
(snip earlier)