So are we to assume that dr5 was more of a marketing exercise than any particular innovation? Otherwise it is difficult to see where the proprietary "magic box" is located.
My sense is that Wood's approach is using pre-existing building blocks (developer formulae etc) & assembling them, rather than innovating novel approaches to the formulae for higher performance.
So are we to assume that dr5 was more of a marketing exercise than any particular innovation? Otherwise it is difficult to see where the proprietary "magic box" is located.
Well.. Wood says "30 yrs ago I came up with something unique and important to photography.. like a flower, new things come from the seeds."
Or he never bothered to do a reasonably thorough literature search (which would have taken weeks in a major research library 30 years ago), and got away with it because it was a process that was so deeply arcane that no one worried about it.
The DR5 process is well known for its reliability and quality. The other kits are known for some spectacular failures such as poor reversal and actual removal of the emulsion from some films. The DR5 process uses a unique chemistry that was acquired via experience and testing and does not match any kit currently available.
PE was knowledgeable about DR5 process. This is what he said about it:
PE mentioned "unique chemistry" in the context of DR5 process. So I'm curious to know about it and what advantages it has over the commonly used chemistry including the much revered Agfa-Gaevert chemistry that uses a developer accelerator. Otherwise I agree with you that reversal processing is well known and involves substantial experimentation and fine tuning for each film.I have faith in Photo Engineer (rest in peace dear friend).
My take on this is as follows -- B&W reversal is no new stuff, it has probably existed since the first negative silver halide emulsion was made. There's tons of past research into it.
However, to produce an optimum slide from a specific B&W film (say, "fp4"), you would need experimentation, lots of experimentation. I guess DR5 is basically lots of experimentation until finding the "right" amount of everything (i.e. sodium sulphite and/or hypo at the first developer, first developer strength, best FD developing agents, best bleach, best clearing bath) for the specific film.
And this takes time, of course, and once you get it right, this is something like a competitive advantage.
I don't think this is so, a patent is filed in order to keep your competitors from stealing your ideas. Because that's just what would happen, and has happened. To the victor goes the glory, a patent is a reward for coming up w/ a unique idea.The whole point and purpose of a patent is to place a method and apparatus into the public domain - for the common good.
A patent is a temporary protection. It’s purpose is to give the “inventor” a foothold in the industry before competitors can make a go at it. It is not intended to stop competition.I don't think this is so, a patent is filed in order to keep your competitors from stealing your ideas. Because that's just what would happen, and has happened. To the victor goes the glory, a patent is a reward for coming up w/ a unique idea.
I don't think this is so, a patent is filed in order to keep your competitors from stealing your ideas. Because that's just what would happen, and has happened. To the victor goes the glory, a patent is a reward for coming up w/ a unique idea.
I am surprised. Thank you for hinting at this.In the US there is no exemption from infringement for personal or private use of a patent.
I have faith in Photo Engineer (rest in peace dear friend).
FYI, as of Nov 2023, DR5 is doing "private services", running development twice a year or so. AFAIK, the recipe has not been released.
So that's over 3 years since the " good news" pertaining to publication was stated. What's the hold-up or is this another of those things that get's announced on Photrio but never comes to fruition for reasons we never seem to get to the bottom of
Products or ideas that might have been, and mentioned on Photrio, could probably fill a 500 page book. I'm sure Harman would be better of ignoring colour film and making huge stocks of Delta 25 in 5"x4" format...
Oh man, I would love Delta 25 in 4x5 (and 8x10, ha ha)
Not sure about potential formats, but I believe Delta 25 had been considered by Harman or possibly a prior version of ILFORD.
The post 2005 Ilford and considered a bad idea. There are post here about it and even a statement by Simon Galley if I recall correctly.
I recall the same post - I think it was to the effect that Delta 25 would undercut Pan-F sales & that (at that time) Ilford had committed to not withdrawing any of their current films (having only just reintroduced some that had gone away during the restructure). Today, it's probably the same in terms of market share, but I think the two factors that likely play a role are that Pan-F is probably quite cost-effective to make, in a way that Delta 25 wouldn't be - unless there was a need to re-engineer Pan-F for some specific reason other than the known minor issues it has. Either way, the chances of it existing in anything other than 135/120 probably aren't great (and always leaves me wondering if the tiny number of people who constantly & visibly demand extra slow film in sheet formats have ever used Delta 100 with proper exposure in a fine grain developer that interacts with the sharpness enhancers designed into the emulsion).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?