Kodak Elon (Metol) discontinued??

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Lloyd Erlick, Jun 10, 2006.

  1. Lloyd Erlick

    Lloyd Erlick Guest


    June 12, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

    This is unquestionable.

    On this subject, Steven Brierley of the newly
    restructured Ilford has some interesting
    remarks.

    http://photoformulary.com/images/Silver_Conference_movies/Steven_Brierley.mov

    regards,
    --le
    ________________________________
    Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
    website: www.heylloyd.com
    telephone: 416-686-0326
    email:
    ________________________________
    --
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jun 12, 2006
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Trouble is, as the US exports jobs, it exports customers as well. And if it
    pays those customers less than the former US employees, they will not be
    able to purchase the company's products. Henry Ford, hardly noted for being
    a humanitarian, paid his employees more than he could have noting, if they
    cannot afford to buy my cars, who will? The US seems to have overlooked this
    point.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 12, 2006
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. I believe I read somewhere that Metol is supposed to yield better contour
    sharpness than Phenidone and it`s derivatives but Phenidone developers are
    cheaper to formulate.
     
    Keith Tapscott, Jun 12, 2006
    #23
  4. Lloyd Erlick

    John Guest

    As is sodium thiosulfate.

    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    www.legacy-photo,com
    www.xs750.net
     
    John, Jun 13, 2006
    #24
  5. I'm getting into this thread late.
    Kodak sold its organic chemical division many years ago. I
    suspect it buys all its chemicals from outside suppliers but
    continues to package some.
    The chemical name for Elon is para methylamino sulfate,
    CAS No.55-55-0 It has been sold under perhaps a dozen trade
    names at various times, the most common being Metol,
    originally an Agfa trademark. It is currently made by
    Mallinkrodt-Baker under their name Pictol and as Metol-Elon
    by Shape Chemicals, and Sigma-Aldrich. Perhaps others. For
    Canada try:

    http://www.jdphotochem.com/

    they have it listed on their on-line catalogue.

    There are a number of US dealers in photographic chemicals
    who ship to Canada. Try:

    http://www.photoformulary.com

    and

    http://www.artcraftchemicals.com/

    See Ryuji Suzuki's site: http://www.silvergrain.org for
    good information on the differences between Metol and
    Phenidone, and between Ascorbic Acid and Hydroquinone. They
    are NOT interchangeable.

    Some of Ryuji's formulas are available from Digital
    Truth/Photographer's Formulary, see:
    http://www.digitaltruth.com/store/silvergrain.html

    Environmental and safety risks of Hydroquinone are
    discussed at:
    http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/sds/PhotoHealth/photohe4.html

    A rather thorough report on biological effects may be
    found at:
    http://inchem.org/documents/hsg/hsg/hsg101.htm

    The main hazard to the environment from Hydroquinone is
    depletion of oxygen in water supplies. This may affect many
    kinds of aquatic life and the balance of the kinds of
    organisms that can survive.
    Environmental hazards are often not very obvious and
    often several steps removed from the immediate effect of the
    pollutant.

    Its probable that in a big city sewer sytem both Metol
    and Hydroquinone are decomposed before they can do any
    damage.

    Metol is a sensitizer causing contact dermatitis. Some
    old literature states that the skin rash is from p-phenelyne
    diamine existing as an impurity, however, more recent
    research shows that Metol itself is a strong sensitizer.
    Contact with the skin of either Metol or Hydroquinone should
    be avoided.

    A last note: I can not agree with those who think
    environmentalists are wackos. There is very good science
    behind much of their concern. This is a very complex subject
    involving the economics of business. Good decisions about it
    are not going to be forthcoming from ignorance or denial.
     
    Richard Knoppow, Jun 13, 2006
    #25
  6. Oh! Good! Then we will not need to be mixing Potassium Cyanide fixers. ;-)
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 13, 2006
    #26
  7. The Kodak rep at the View Camera Magazine conference
    this weekend (June 11):

    "Kodak is committed to making photographic chemistry
    for black and white and is not discontinuing any of
    our products. Of course, that may change tomorrow...."
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jun 13, 2006
    #27
  8. I suspect they mean packaged solutions, not individual
    chemicals. Kodak used to be a major manufacturer of organic
    chemicals (Eastman Organic Chemicals) and plastics but sold
    these divisions more than a decade ago.
     
    Richard Knoppow, Jun 14, 2006
    #28
  9. Lloyd Erlick

    John Guest

    Then perhaps all hydroquinone creams used commonly for age spots and
    hair dyes should be banned ? Hydroquinone in the modest quantities
    used in a darkroom is relatively low on the toxicity scale. The use of
    chlorinated bleach in laundry is probably far higher and far
    reaching.
    Not all are whackos. Just the majority of the over-active busy bodies
    who want to preserve every blade of grass at the cost of technology
    and the progress of humanity.
    And there is a far greater amount of ignorance combined with biased
    rhetoric. Believe me I'm all for saving the snails, whales and dales
    but not without an effective and practical plan for doing so. Most
    environmentalists are just as short-sighted, and perhaps moreso, than
    many industrialists.
    I prefer responsible management to paranoid reactionism. I know about
    some of the games businesses play and the Hell that has been created
    in some locations such as Mexico and Taiwan. To address those issues
    one would be better off addressing the influences of greed on the
    human soul rather than simply cleaning up messes like the Exxon
    Valdez, Love Canal, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Unfortunately the
    human soul is far more complicated than a good photograph. Perhaps
    that is why many seek simplicity ?

    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    www.legacy-photo,com
    www.xs750.net
     
    John, Jun 14, 2006
    #29
  10. Lloyd Erlick

    John Guest

    John, Jun 14, 2006
    #30
  11. Lloyd Erlick

    John Guest

    Yeah they really give a care about the photographic industry. Methinks
    they haven't for quite some time. When was T-Max introduced ?

    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    www.legacy-photo,com
    www.xs750.net
     
    John, Jun 14, 2006
    #31
  12. Lloyd Erlick

    Lloyd Erlick Guest


    June 14, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

    Over the years I've damaged clothing several
    times with ordinary laundry bleach.

    For every case of itchy skin caused by
    Hydroquinone or Metol, I wonder how many eyes
    have been injured by chlorine bleach? How
    many facial injuries? How many toddlers
    doused?

    I've never seen any admonition to wear safety
    glasses when handling laundry bleach. Or oven
    cleaner either, for that matter. Or Drano.
    But sodium thiowhatchamacallit, oh boy, look
    out, eek, it's a ... white powder!

    Do they put those little colored bits in
    laundry detergent so it's not a white powder
    any more?

    regards,
    --le
    ________________________________
    Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
    website: www.heylloyd.com
    telephone: 416-686-0326
    email:
    ________________________________
    --
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jun 14, 2006
    #32
  13. Lloyd Erlick

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    June 14, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

    That's committment!

    --le
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jun 14, 2006
    #33
  14. Lloyd Erlick

    Rod Smith Guest

    Hyperbole won't help in a discussion of such matters, unless by "help" you
    mean "enflame the discussion." I'm skeptical that you could find a single
    environmentalist who literally wants to "preserve every blade of grass,"
    except perhaps one who is literally living in a mental hospital. By using
    this sort of exaggeration, you both blur your own position (we don't know
    just how far you think is too far in terms of environmental protections)
    and annoy those who identify themselves as environmentalists, perhaps even
    those whose activities you would not find objectionable. The result could
    easily become a pointless flame war rather than a rational discussion of
    an important topic.
     
    Rod Smith, Jun 14, 2006
    #34
  15. Lloyd Erlick

    Mike Guest

    Mike, Jun 16, 2006
    #35
  16. Lloyd Erlick

    John Guest

    Yep. And it eliminates the need for cleaning as well !


    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    www.legacy-photo,com
    www.xs750.net
     
    John, Jun 17, 2006
    #36
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.