DR5 getting published?

[Tom Kershaw]

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.

 

[Lachlan Young]

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.

The 'magic box' is, I suspect, the order in which certain procedures are done - and whatever is done to deliver absolute Dmax - Ron Mowrey suggested that something like Sodium Sulphide would do the job as it'll reduce the silver halide to silver metal.

 

[Lachlan Young]

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.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

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.

PE was knowledgeable about DR5 process. This is what he said 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.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Looks like DR5 B&W reversal process will likely be published in the next edition of the Darkroom Cookbook:

"Well, this was surprising news today, when Steve Anchell sent us an email asking if we wanted to publish dr5 in the upcoming DCB. While we still need to work out details, this is a strong possibility. Since our falling away from British Journal, we have been trying to figure out how to get the dr5 process out there. We think DCB may be a good fit to give dr5 the legacy it deserves, and it's time to share it."

https://www.facebook.com/dr5BWslide/photos/a.10154398392657237/10158131636042237/

 

[flavio81]

PE was knowledgeable about DR5 process. This is what he said about it:

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.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

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.

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.

 

[gone]

The whole point and purpose of a patent is to place a method and apparatus into the public domain - for the common good.

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.

 

[Jay Schrotenboer]

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.

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.

 

[AgX]

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.

To the contrary.

The idea of a patent is to promote technology development to the benefit of all.
By giving an inventor a limited in time protection, on the prerequisite of making the details of his invention public from the start.
Thus giving him time to commercialize and profite from it, the same time giving an incentive to his competitors for own ideas.
Also his ideas are free to be copied for private use.


Patents are amongst the most misunderstood topics at this forum.

 

[alanrockwood]

In the US there is no exemption from infringement for personal or private use of a patent. (This is different from copyright law, which does allow a limited amount of "fair use" of copyrighted material.)

However, as a practical matter, if you build it in your basement (so to speak) and use it yourself without commercial intent then the chances of a patent holder hauling you into court for patent infringement are pretty slim. Even if the patent holder finds out about a case of infringement for personal use it isn't going to be worth it for them to haul you into court. It would cost them too much and they wouldn't recover their legal costs, so as a practical matter a person is pretty much free to use a patent for personal non-commercial use, even though it isn't strictly legal to do so.

In the unlikely event that the patent holder ever finds out about the personal use, the most they are likely to do is to send a cease and desist letter, and that might not even happen.

Disclosure: I am not a lawyer, so don't construe this as professional legal advice. It is my opinion based on what I know about US patent law.

One last point: There is an exemption in American common law (not statutory law) for research use of a patent, but that is a very narrow exemption, not a broad exemption for research use.

 

[alanrockwood]

One additional point. Another form of protection of intellectual property is a trade secret. The rules for trade secrets are different from the rules for patents. For one thing, protection under a trade secret never expires. However, the protection can disappear if the "secret" becomes no longer a secret.

Also, the issue of combining patents and trade secrets gets into a complicated and murky part of intellectual property law in the US. Basically you have to choose one form of protection or the other. If someone (let us say Coca Cola) has been practicing a trade secret for a long time then they can't patent it because they have been practicing the invention for longer than the grace period for patenting inventions. However, someone else (not Coca Cola) could patent Coca Cola's formula if they invent the formula independently and legally. In that case, Coca Cola could no longer make and sell products that use their formula because someone else would hold the patent for the formula.

The above comments apply to US law, not necessarily to intellectual property law in other countries.

 

[AgX]

In the US there is no exemption from infringement for personal or private use of a patent.

I am surprised. Thank you for hinting at this.

 

[PhilBurton]

I have faith in Photo Engineer (rest in peace dear friend).

???

 

[Bill Burk]

???

PE, Photo Engineer, Ron Mowry. He wrote prolifically and helpfully here, as well as befriended many. He passed away a while ago and we miss him.

 

[Richard Man]

FYI, as of Nov 2023, DR5 is doing "private services", running development twice a year or so. AFAIK, the recipe has not been released.

 

[pentaxuser]

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

Maybe someone changed their mind or in fact we read into some announcement something that was never there?

pentaxuser

 

[Tom Kershaw]

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...

 

[Ivo Stunga]

He's also stated you cannot produce slides with Ilford Reversal Processing, something I've been producing slides with for quite some years - so I question the validity of his statements, at least the louder one's.

Nonetheless it'd be interesting to do both processes and to compare the same film, shot at the same time/location, side-by-side and to see for myself

Alas - why should that day ever come, why 180 change of mind?

 

[Richard Man]

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)

 

[Tom Kershaw]

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.

 

[Anon Ymous]

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.

 

[Lachlan Young]

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).

 

[Ian Grant]

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).

It was the same reason Ilford discontinued Delta 400 sheet film.

Ian

 

[Tom Taylor]

In the DC 3d edition a David Wood procedure for B&W reversal printing, including formulas, was given. I followed that procedure using Kodak D-11 as the first developer for normal contrast and got excellent results once I had determined that the printed dilution of 1:3 was a Scribner's error and should be 3:1. I sent that over to Steve Anchell for the 4th edition and he said that he was forwarding it to David. I don't know if it ever got corrected as I'm still using the 3d edition. The only improvement I can think of would be to use a chemical fogging agent instead of light.