Digital BW, The Print

----- Original Message -----
From: "sceptre12345" <am1000@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson3200 - Test results


> From Kodak's site there is a definition of flammable.
> http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/hse/solvent.jhtml
>
> Flash Point (FP) - This is the minimum temperature at which a
liquid
> gives off vapors in sufficient concentrations to form an
ignitable
> mixture with air as determined by Uniform Fire Code Standard
9-1 & 9-
> 2. A chemical is called flammable if its flash point is less
than 100
> degrees F, and combustible if the flash point is greater than
100
> degrees F. The use of chemicals with flash points requires
additional
> safety considerations.

I've done some tests with a negative film that wasn't good
anyway. Left the sandwich of scannerglass/film/polyester and
lighter fluid in between all for 24 hours on the scanner. First
there's hardly any fluid evaporated, didn't notice discoloring
either. Skin fat could be the slight haze that is left on the
film, could also be that the lighter fluid has a lower grade of
distillation than the pro mounting fluids. If the film will be
used for scans only there isn't a problem. Wet mounting has more
advantages than just getting the film flat, it fills all the
scratches, gives a better optical path through the layers and
when care is taken should give less dust as a glass mounted film.
On skin fat: in the old days the darkroom man would rub a finger
along the side of his nose and apply it on the negative to fill
the scratches, there's no need to that with wet mounting. Wonder
whether that ecologically correct advice attracts more flames.

Ernst