Rationale for having a long life developer and method for testing

Petzi;

Thanks, but I'll try to get it locally or from an APUG sponsor such as Calumet. (If it goes on the list)

PE

Any "development" with this test Ron?

Mattg said:

Any "development" with this test Ron?

Click to expand...

I think that this had best be left unanswered at this time.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

I think that this had best be left unanswered at this time.

PE

Click to expand...

How about 2 years later?

The product of this work is now on sale. I cannot say more due to a potenial conflict of interest.

I rest my case.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

The product of this work is now on sale. I cannot say more due to a potenial conflict of interest.

I rest my case.

PE

Click to expand...

I'm not conflicted at all. Haven't used the product yet, but have seen it on sale:

http://www.photoformulary.com/Deskt...tabindex=2&categoryid=33&selection=0&langID=0

I rest my keyboard.

Lee

My reasons for preferring longer-life developers are:

(1) convenience of not having to mix each time
(2) environmental concerns... less waste

My reasons for preferring one-shot mixes are:

(1) highly predictable results
(2) the particular characteristics i.e. from amidol, POTA etc. POTA is probably the shortest-life developer I've met. I wish I didn't have to toss it after 1-2 hrs but c'est la vie.

Generally my feeling is that people probably worry too much about developers "going bad"... especially paper developers. This leads to premature disposal, which is unfortunate. I find that PQ retains good characteristics even after 1 yrs, simply capped and with no special vacuuming or whatever. Likewise D76/ID11, in concentrated form. I was also rather surprised to find that wd2d+ part A and B last at least 6 months, stored separately and without any special treatment... just sitting on the shelf in capped brown bottles.