- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
ho jerry
its tricky to find
you go to articles first then do the search under
" remembering 777 "
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Harvey/harvey.html
I always found the mixing instructions for this hyped up stuff odd. The recommendation was to mix the "developing agent" part of the dry mix in boiling or near-boiling water.
This indicates to me the presence of the developing agent Glycin which is only sparing soluble in water at the pH of this developer.
While it might not be Germain's or Edwal 12, it is almost certainly some sort of PPD-Glycin-sulfite thing based on the Sease formulas, perhaps with an additional developing agent and/or alkali.
Based on everything people say it is reputed to be a fine grain developer. In that respect I wouldn't suggest FX-2 as a replacement. Glycin would be the only similarity as FX-2 is a low- sulfite "acutance" formula.
It would be interesting to do some objective sensitometry on this "777" stuff. Whether or not it is speed-losing could tell us something.
Bluegrass swears up and down that there is no glycin in 777
16 minutes for TMY is a long time, are you developing for alternative printing?
Harvey's Panthermic 777 developer is a favorite of mine for certain films that i use, it is a developer that is a little difficult to get and rumors of lately have been that it is no longer made.
The good news is that it is close to being available again. I just got off the phone with Lori from Bluegrass Packaging who confirmed that they are close.
If you have used the 777 in the past and want to get more or, if you are curious and want to try for the first time, email lori@bluegrasspackaging.com and let her know how much you are interested in buying.
If enough is showing an interest it might speed up the availability.
I currently have enough for years to come but will buy more to help make it available again.
If unfamiliar with this replenishment type developer make a google search and there will be a few hits.
Panthermic 777 is a long lasting developer, my current 1 gallon jug was mixed two and a half year ago and still going strong.
Oh... wow, that was quite a string of derails there.
This is very exciting news, and I'll have to write Lori later today.
It seems every so often there's an argument over whether it really lived up to the hype, and some accusations of silver bullet hunting, but I think it's usually better to have more options than less. Maybe now someone will be able to produce some good, objective examples of its behavior.
JLP, how much do you think is a "good supply"? What kind of volume are you running through that batch? I think I remember reading somewhere that BPI had a 5-gallon minimum the last time it was available.
I agree. I have been told by Bluegrass that they made a batch but still need to package it up. That was two months ago.I have never use the products from Bluegrass, yet I have read that they do have a good product. The problem that I am having with them is all the drama that surrounds them.
If they are close, why would they start up a batch of Harvey's 777, just because there are enough buyers. Because from what I have seen from surfing the net, is that there are a lot of buyers, but they are tired of this on again, off again affair with Bluegrass. They either make it or they do not.
Well that's all I have to say.
#1 Son
The headline in my first post is inacurate stating that it is made again admitted but, it got the attention from a few readers.
I don't see any inacuracies in the rest of the post.
the manufacturers have told me the recipe on that website is ' waaayyy off "
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?