Re: print washer

[SPECTRUM <spectrum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (SPECTRUM)]

On Fri, 4 Jun 1999 23:08:25 -0500, you wrote:

>Considering that chemical removal is via diffusion, there is no reason at
>all to doubt the washing ability of a tray siphon. All that is required for
>archival washing is several changes of the wash water. Tray siphons are
>emminently able to meet this criteria. In point of fact, I have been doing
>print washing is a 16x20 tray run by a siphon for going on 20 years now,
>with no reason to believe that I am making non archival prints to date.

	Well it has been shown that the tray siphons have very uneven
washing. I think it reasonable to assume that this would effect the
diffusion of argento-thiosulfate complexes. That in fact the complexes
may well not wash out of the center of the prints as the majority of
fresh water is circulated around the outside of the print.

	FWIW, I think simply soaking-changing-soaking is as good as
the tray siphon if not better.

>Regarding Mr. Wilhelms methods, I have heard much conjecture about his
>notorious dislike for Eastman Kodak Corp, but nothing to bring his
>methodology into disrepute. Perhaps Mr. Douglas could elucidate further
>regarding his claim in this matter?

	I once called the Image Permanence Institute in Rochester and
spoke with one of the people in charge there regarding Ctein's article
on peroxide generation and resultant image bleaching. Since I had him
on the phone I took the opportunity to ask many questions not the
least of which was regarding Prof.Wilhelm's work He stated that not
many people believe that Mr.Wilhelm's work was objective and accurate
and this even though Mr.Wilhelm sits on the board there.

	Also there was an article in one of the processing lab
magazines that showed how his processes for testing was not in line
with ANSI standards. I'll see if I can find this article for direct
referencing.
	Another such article with similar thought is posted on Kodak's
site at:

http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/en/consumer/education/imageStability.shtml

	And further my main argument is :

	How can two completely similar papers give such remarkably
different results under identical processing and conditions ?

	The answer should be obvious . Unfortunately it isn't . In act
I think Fuji themselves found that HW's data was a little to
optimistic and has since lowered the life expectancy of prints made on
Crystal.

Regards,

John S. Douglas           Photographer, webmaster  & darkroom wizard !
Fine wedding and portrait photography     Black & White our specialty.
Spectrum Photographic Inc. Temp: http://www.cybercomm.net/~spectrum
         Bringing the fine art of photography to your wedding !



*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************