From: Darkroom User on

David Nebenzahl;886997 Wrote:
> On 8/12/2010 12:15 AM Darkroom User spake thus:
> [i]
> David Nebenzahl;886934 Wrote:
> [color=green][i]
> IanG;886420 Wrote:
>
> I was being sarcastic, but I do take your concerns seriously. My serious
>
> answer to your queries about pyro developers is really "don't bother".
> It's not worth the hassle. You can get wonderful results using any of an
>
> array of readily-available conventional developers. So unless you insist
>
> on doing something peculiar, boutique-y and idiosyncratic, stick with
> D-76/ID-11, Microdol-X, Xtol, etc.
>
> By the way, just curious: what's with the strange quoting style you used
>
> (putting previously-quoted material in ALL CAPS, with non-functional
> "tags", like )? That in itself is kinda like using pyro. I'm
> just saying ...
>
>
> --
> The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
> with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.
>
> - Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)I am posting through the Photo-Banter site: www.photobanter.com
and those "tags" come up when I reply, although I do highlight certain
quotes in bold type.

By posting through this site, it helps to prevent receiving spam emails,
although I am not sure if I am getting to read all of the replies to the
threads.

Thank you for your reasonable reply to stick with regular developers. I
was curious to know why some people use pyro developers instead of
normal non staining developers and what they perceive their advantages
to be.
I am here to learn from the more experienced photographers and darkroom
users. :-)




--
Darkroom User
From: David Nebenzahl on
On 8/13/2010 1:18 AM Darkroom User spake thus:

> I am posting through the Photo-Banter site: www.photobanter.com and
> those "tags" come up when I reply, although I do highlight certain
> quotes in bold type.
>
> By posting through this site, it helps to prevent receiving spam
> emails, although I am not sure if I am getting to read all of the
> replies to the threads.

OK, you're forgiven: it's not your fault. The software you're using to
post (Photobanter's forum software) is brain-damaged, at least where
quoting text is concerned.

Most of us here access Usenet (that's where these threads reside) the
conventional way, using a mail client (aka "newsreader"), which shows
the newsgroup the way [insert name of deity here] intended. You might
try it yourself sometime. Actually more direct than going through a web
site.

And it's very easy to post without receiving spam: just do like me and
use a phony "handle". Zero spam.


--
The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.

- Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)