What's going on??

Andre Noble · Mar 25, 2017

Hey, Mr. Photo Engineer, glad to see you're still kicking around here. I have not been on APUG in over a year.

Can you please take a look at this thread: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Just seeking some expert advice on what caused these purplish splothes in 14 year old home developed bw film stored in cool, mostly dry so cal climate, and what if anything I can do to arrest their progress, thanks.

Your knowledge is appreciated!

removed account4 · Mar 25, 2017

i still find it hard to believe that 1/2 of the answers in the film/processing forum are wrong.

images39 · Mar 25, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
How many time have you had posts directed at you and also have PMs sent to you asking you to please look at the thread and answer it? I have hand literally thousands of requests. This is pretty hard to ignore.

PE

I've not had people direct posts and PMs at me the way you've had, so I'd acknowledge that your experience is different. But I'd also surmise that it's atypical compared to most APUGers. I still believe that the terse, barbed replies to those asking for help will drive people away from APUG. They'll assume that it's a home for high priest curmudgeons of analog, who look down on those less knowledgeable. That cant' be healthy for APUG long term.

Dale

Toffle · Mar 25, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
I don't get that.

PE

Sorry, PE. I was just making a feeble joke at my own expense regarding both repeated questions and bad answers.

ic-racer · Mar 25, 2017

I'm not happy to be lured into reading a thread about digital photography. For example "Help with negative development, odd marks" turns out to be some lame digital photography issue. Or "Need help with lens..." turns out to be some issue with a DSLR body. Or "How to get the 70's Tri-x look" turns out to be a thread about Photoshop digital filtering. If I waste my time reading the thread, yes, I'm going to waste a little more time to post a reply to 'go somewhere else.'

Also, I have mentioned it before, why is there no "Beginner's Forum?" How about even a "Sticky" How to develop rollfilm in a daylight tank. Or how to make a projection print?

Athiril · Mar 25, 2017

Telling people to google or use the forum search is often not all that helpful, especially if they dont know what exactly they're looking for.

It also makes searching for things more difficult in the long run.

I have come across so many search results on certain things where the responses are to search for it yourself etc or some vague implication.

Googling also brings up the unanswered questions (including telling people to google it) which depending on the topic is often in far greater supply than questions that have been answered thoroughly.

Arklatexian · Mar 26, 2017

ic-racer said:
I'm not happy to be lured into reading a thread about digital photography. For example "Help with negative development, odd marks" turns out to be some lame digital photography issue. Or "Need help with lens..." turns out to be some issue with a DSLR body. Or "How to get the 70's Tri-x look" turns out to be a thread about Photoshop digital filtering. If I waste my time reading the thread, yes, I'm going to waste a little more time to post a reply to 'go somewhere else.'

Also, I have mentioned it before, why is there no "Beginner's Forum?" How about even a "Sticky" How to develop rollfilm in a daylight tank. Or how to make a projection print?

The first paragraph brings up a problem that people who refuse to read because reading is "dated". Most of the information presented on the computer for photographers is, in my experience, aimed at "Digital Photographers". Not being willing to read books, many magazine articles, etc. means ignoring articles about film photography going all the way back to Fox Talbot. That seems to me like a terrible waste of information.........Regards!

pdeeh · Mar 26, 2017

ic-racer said:
a thread about digital photography. For example "Help with negative development, odd marks" turns out to be some lame digital photography issue. Or "Need help with lens..." turns out to be some issue with a DSLR body. Or "How to get the 70's Tri-x look" turns out to be a thread about Photoshop digital filtering

I've never seen a single thread on those subjects. Not one.

Truzi · Mar 26, 2017

The basic questions need direct, averaged, answers. We probably don't need to confuse the inexperienced with which developer is best for doing what, esoteric dilutions, etc.

I think some basic FAQs would be better than stickies, as "sticky" tends to be interpreted differently. The problem is, who would write the FAQs, and also, what could be agreed upon (for example, there are feuds over whether to use stop baths).

It would be much easier to refer someone to an FAQ as opposed to telling them to search, or to find a sticky that is not in one centralized area. I believe a big problem (aside from disagreements) is the information is spread all over this BBS. There have been attempts at master threads, but there are several of most things (like the c-41 development threads), and people often offer confounding information within each thread.
The best I've found to one central source on anything is PE's "The definitive word (I hope) on color stabilzers!"

klownshed · Mar 26, 2017

jnanian said:
i still find it hard to believe that 1/2 of the answers in the film/processing forum are wrong.

Reading some threads, I'm amazed that half the answers are correct!

Martin Rickards · Mar 26, 2017

I thought the APUG forum was short for A Pugnacious forum

Julie McLeod · Mar 26, 2017

oldtimermetoo said:
The first paragraph brings up a problem that people who refuse to read because reading is "dated". Most of the information presented on the computer for photographers is, in my experience, aimed at "Digital Photographers". Not being willing to read books, many magazine articles, etc. means ignoring articles about film photography going all the way back to Fox Talbot. That seems to me like a terrible waste of information.........Regards!

Maybe it seems like I refuse to read, I don't know. In truth, I've acquired a half dozen books in the last year, all of which were recommended in threads I found here on searching. I'd actually much rather get my information from a book because an author presents a single answer with nobody chiming in to argue but still, I sometimes need more specific information on equipment, or simply clarification and help understanding terminology used in the books. I appreciate that APUG has a wealth of experience that I lack and I read it voraciously. But seen from the outside, this forum looks very insular and can be very intimidating for a beginner. I'm grateful for the many members here who are willing to answer in a friendly, helpful way, and who make beginners feel welcome but a lot of folks in this thread have come off as just the opposite and their attitudes are precisely the reason that I'm an avid reader of the forum but not an avid participant. As I said before, that's not the way to grow a forum...

Nodda Duma · Mar 26, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
...

I am a professional in the field of building analog products and this experience goes from start to finish, color and B&W and includes processes. Think of how many times I have been jumped on by those who "know better". I don't pretend to be right all of the time, and have admitted to my errors when they take place. However, I have a hard time passing on information when I am constantly called to task by many members. And, it goes on over and over and over.

...

PE

I can sympathize, Ron, having spent my entire career in lens design and designing/testing optical systems. I stopped responding to most threads about optics for similar reasons. People don't like when Truth is misaligned with their preconceived notions.

-Jason

Photo Engineer · Mar 26, 2017

Andre Noble said:
Hey, Mr. Photo Engineer, glad to see you're still kicking around here. I have not been on APUG in over a year.

Can you please take a look at this thread: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Just seeking some expert advice on what caused these purplish splothes in 14 year old home developed bw film stored in cool, mostly dry so cal climate, and what if anything I can do to arrest their progress, thanks.

Your knowledge is appreciated!

And, I have posted a reply.

This is typical of many PMs sent to me, or e-mails. I have never failed to answer one. I have had over 3000 PMs by rough count.

Thanks.

PE

Photo Engineer · Mar 26, 2017

Athiril said:
Telling people to google or use the forum search is often not all that helpful, especially if they dont know what exactly they're looking for.

It also makes searching for things more difficult in the long run.

I have come across so many search results on certain things where the responses are to search for it yourself etc or some vague implication.

Googling also brings up the unanswered questions (including telling people to google it) which depending on the topic is often in far greater supply than questions that have been answered thoroughly.

Dan, with over 26,000 posts I do not remember, nor have I indexed all references. Like a good teacher, I often leave the research to the student to help them learn. They can always come back for more information or I can repeat my older post.

PE

Sirius Glass · Mar 26, 2017

pdeeh said:
I've never seen a single thread on those subjects. Not one.

That is because you are smart enough to read the title and know that that thread should be skipped OR that others choose to "Report this post" as a digital troll so that the monitors moved it DPUG before you got there. Consider yourself as one of those special blessed people. I wish that I was as fortunate at you.

Luckless · Mar 26, 2017

A small bit of technological irony: Replying to a basic question with the phrase "Just google it" will increase the odds of that thread coming up in a google search when trying to find the answer to the basic question posed in the thread.

Peter Schrager · Mar 26, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
Brian, this is not about me, but I can exemplify the problem, I think, by the posts I've made in this thread. I like to help people and I've been told that I am a good teacher. So, I try to help newbies here, and others of course. But, sometimes it is a case of helping someone by getting them to help themselves. And repeat questions, with bad answers don't help.

PE

jnanian said:
i still find it hard to believe that 1/2 of the answers in the film/processing forum are wrong.

I'm never wrong!!lol!!

Sirius Glass · Mar 26, 2017

ic-racer said:
I'm not happy to be lured into reading a thread about digital photography. For example "Help with negative development, odd marks" turns out to be some lame digital photography issue. Or "Need help with lens..." turns out to be some issue with a DSLR body. Or "How to get the 70's Tri-x look" turns out to be a thread about Photoshop digital filtering. If I waste my time reading the thread, yes, I'm going to waste a little more time to post a reply to 'go somewhere else.'

Also, I have mentioned it before, why is there no "Beginner's Forum?" How about even a "Sticky" How to develop rollfilm in a daylight tank. Or how to make a projection print?

oldtimermetoo said:
The first paragraph brings up a problem that people who refuse to read because reading is "dated". Most of the information presented on the computer for photographers is, in my experience, aimed at "Digital Photographers". Not being willing to read books, many magazine articles, etc. means ignoring articles about film photography going all the way back to Fox Talbot. That seems to me like a terrible waste of information.........Regards!

+10,000

Peter Schrager · Mar 26, 2017

I'm so glad we all agree to disagree
Everyone here should know that their input is valid and worthwhile. ..I just wanted to raise awareness to be nice so that we can keep this wonderful craft of analog photography continuing!

Photo Engineer · Mar 26, 2017

Thank you Peter.

pentaxuser · Mar 26, 2017

A propos this thread, I replied to a post last night which was very vaguely entitled Ilford Delta. Reading it, it was about requesting a time for D3200 at EI 1600 in D76 1+1. I replied as best I could but could not give the poster a direct answer as I have never used D76 with D3200 but I did suggest developing it for the time stated for 3200 and as it was by rotary processing I suggested a reduction of 15%. I have since discovered that there is actually a time on the MDC for presumably normal inversion agitation but I forgot to mention that resource.

My observation is that I have been the only one to respond so far and while "one swallow does not make a summer" I would have been surprised if even a year or so ago there were not several replies by now.

Maybe the post wasn't spotted and maybe the poster did not help himself by a vague title but I do wonder if our collective helpfulness has diminished to an extent

pentaxuser

tedr1 · Mar 26, 2017

I saw that question also and came to the conclusion the poster had read neither the developer instructions or the film instructions. I had two choices, post saying "RTFM", or pass, I passed.

removed account4 · Mar 26, 2017

sorry to sound harsh, but
developing times on the MDC, developers packaging and films info sheets are starting points ... he was looking for a personal recommendation.

... like maybe most of the post on this website ...
what camera should i get;
what developer should i use;
what film should i get;
what paper should i use;
what light meter should i get;
what is the thread size to my enlarger lens;
whats the best way to convert my light meter to an exposure, spot or zone meter ....

it is too bad that people who benefit from asking questions make harsh and passive aggressive comments about
people who ask the same exact sorts of questions ...

oh well ...

Gerald C Koch · Mar 26, 2017

I like the joke in The Big Bang Theory contrasting theoretical and empirical solutions. The comment was that the theory applied "only to spherical chickens in a vacuum." Those trained in the hard sciences will probably appreciate this joke more. I points out that gross approximations often have to be made.

I would say that most of the developer carryover is on the surface of the film and in the tank itself. Therefor a few seconds rinse removes most of it. Yes your fixer lasts a bit less but this is offset by the cost of using a stop bath. So use whatever you want. Personally I have used a brief rinse for decades without any sign of problems.

Photo Engineer · Mar 26, 2017

Jerry, I agree with that, but try a no stop process with an 8x10 sheet of film or paper and you might change your mind. Or, try it with a neutral or alkaline fix!

It does not always work. That is why some answers are very complex.

PE

removed account4 · Mar 26, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
Jerry, I agree with that, but try a no stop process with an 8x10 sheet of film or paper and you might change your mind. Or, try it with a neutral or alkaline fix!

It does not always work. That is why some answers are very complex.

PE

i, not jerry but ...
i have been doing it without stop with 8x10 even 11x14 paper, never a problem
4x5 and 8x10 film too ...
i use tap water to mix my chemistry too, never a problem ( 3-4 water supplies )

What's going on??

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency