Re: [SPAM] Re: expiration dates on film boxes

From: Sandy King ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 10/14/05-05:35:38 PM Z
Message-id: <6.0.0.22.2.20051014193154.01d85a98@mail.charter.net>

That is my experience also. I have used TRI-X 320 on and off for over
twenty years in the field, and I have also run numerous BTZS type tests on
it. It is one of the most stable films I have used, as all of the tests I
have done have been virtually dead on with reference to the others, except
for a slight difference in B+F resulting from age and conditions of storage.

Sandy

At 02:15 PM 10/13/2005, you wrote:
>Shannon,
>
>I have worked with TriX for over 30 years, and have found it to be a very
>stable film. I have shot new fresh out of the box and have worked with a lot
>of old film. TriX Has very good keeping power I think one of the best. As to
>unprocessed film I have been known to have film in holders for up to a year
>with out much problem.
>
>The new and old TriX IMO is pritty much the same. I did the new Kodak times
>and went back to my old notes. As a teache of workshops and classrooms. I
>find that when you go down the path of tube processing you start to walk a
>fine line in negative quality. When you work with small amounts of developer
>you run into problems.
>
>Make sure your chemistry is fresh and dump after use. Please scan a negative
>and pm it to me
>
>Jan Pietrzak
>
>
>
> >From: Shannon Stoney <sstoney@pdq.net>
> >Date: Thu Oct 13 12:30:34 CDT 2005
> >To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> >Subject: expiration dates on film boxes
>
> >I've been thinking about Dan's idea of the "end of the silver era"
> >hypothesis about inconsistent results with TXP. I just looked at the
> >two boxes of TXP that I have. One was bought at a local camera store
> >and has an expiration date of 2/2008. I used this film a couple of
> >weeks ago in New Orleans and it performed perfectly. The other came
> >from BH PHotovideo and has an expiration date of 3/2006. It seems
> >that this box from BH is two years older than the other box! I have
> >not used this film yet.
> >
> >That got me wondering: how is film dated? How long is it expected
> >to last? That is, when a sheet of TXP is absolutely fresh, right out
> >of the factory, how much into the future is it dated? And why would
> >the camera store have much fresher film than BH?
> >
> >--shannon
>
>Content-Type: text/plain; name="SpamAssassinReport.txt"
>Content-Disposition: inline; filename="SpamAssassinReport.txt"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.417 (Entity 5.417)
>
>Spam detection software, running on the system "mx2.clemson.edu", has
>identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
>has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
>similar future email. If you have any questions, see
>postmaster@clemson.edu for details.
>
>Content preview: Shannon, I have worked with TriX for over 30 years, and
> have found it to be a very stable film. I have shot new fresh out of
> the box and have worked with a lot of old film. TriX Has very good
> keeping power I think one of the best. As to unprocessed film I have
> been known to have film in holders for up to a year with out much
> problem. [...]
>
>Content analysis details: (5.6 points, 5.0 required)
>
> pts rule name description
>---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
> 0.2 NO_REAL_NAME From: does not include a real name
> 1.7 RM_fl_ConsWord6s To contains word consisting of consecutive
> consonants
> 0.2 MR_NOT_ATTRIBUTED_IP Beta rule: an non-attributed IPv4 found in
> headers
> 3.5 VOWEL_FROM_7 Impronouncable from header (7+ consecutive
> vowels)
> 0.0 NO_RDNS2 Sending MTA has no reverse DNS
Received on Fri Oct 14 17:36:10 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 11/07/05-09:46:19 AM Z CST