Sirius Glass
Subscriber
I know I was trying to help him/her, and those who might read the thread afterwards.
I just wanted to reemphasize the above crucial point. It is at the heart of so many of my own responses as well.
Too often here on APUG we have contributors who for whatever reasons decide to publicly swear by the results they obtained by developing something in yak piss. Or horse snot. Or fish poop. Or god knows what else. All in the name of needing to differentiate themselves and their "processes" as somehow being unique from the rest.
One of the serious problems with these "experiments"/"published results" is that at some point down the line a relative newcomer is going to come here, search in good faith, and read those so-called results. Maybe it's someone into digital who wants to see what all the fuss over film is all about. Or maybe an older parent's son or daughter who found dad's old Minolta SLR in the closet.
They will come here because of APUG's reputation for deep and accurate member knowledge regarding traditional photography. Then they will see someone's angry insistence that yak piss is just as good—no, better—than Kodak D-76. Along with equally emotional insistences that anyone who disagrees is somehow being abusive. Or is stopping all of the "fun". Followed then by dozens of subsequent pages of posts by more knowledgeable members trying to undo the factual damage for posterity.
Words have meanings, and meanings have consequences, and consequences can last a long, long time online. Especially when a site is Google-indexed. Not a bad thing to keep in mind...
Ken
[Edit to the moderator(s) reading this thread: Perhaps we should consider something like creating a new Experimental Processes sub-forum into which all of the yak piss threads could be directed? At least that way when beginners read them for the first time they will automatically have a little bit of built-in explanatory context attached? Just a thought...]
In principle, yes. But in reality, no. At least not at the beginning. I fail to see the learning curve advantage in suggesting a beginner start by trying to develop his or her first rolls of film in yak piss. Or in an edible developer. Or in Dektol. Or without a stop solution. Or with contaminated fixer. Or with no final wash.
Early confusion does not breed a deeper and more intuitive understanding of a new subject. Or engender much of a desire to continue the learning process. There are good reasons that high school physics instructors do not begin with relativity. Or with voodoo magic.
Ken
+1
In the past some experimenting APUGgers would post their finding as the Messianic answer for processing and did not state that they were posting that their work was experimental. Any new visitor to APUG would have thought that the posting was the method to use. Other APUGgers would take them to task about not posting disclaimers or warnings. That produced dissension and problems that are not needed. Experiments need to be clearly labeled.