Talk:Gelatin silver print

Merge Proposal

I'd like to suggest merging the article Gelatin silver print into this article. It appears to be based on the same source and to be describing the same photographic process. It appears to me that the name of this article is more consistent with the terminology used in the other articles on photographic processes. EastTN (talk) 20:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

While we're at it it should probably be merged with the article on the dry plate process as well, since they are really the same thing. Captain Biggles (talk) 23:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I personally would disagree with the following comments. The process of producing a silver gelatine print and an actual silver gelatine print are two different things, meaning that if you merge the two, it could become difficult to distinguish between the two. Just my own personal views! :P 'Dreamweaver86' 16:10 7th April —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.134.163 (talk) 15:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but in discussion of one you inevitably are led to the other. There is no need to distinguish between articles on the process to make a photograph and a page describing the photograph itself. One says "This is how you make a thing" and the other "This is how a thing is made." All that leads to is clutter.Captain Biggles (talk) 13:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

It's Charles Bennett, not Charles Harper Bennet, and he's the real inventor

See http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/DSphotodry5E6.htm for the photograph "A pack of Bennett's Instantaneous Gelatine Photographic Plates". The photo shows "made by C. Bennett." The article discusses Bennett's contribution--he actually was the first to make gelatin silver plates; Maddox only wrote an article suggesting the idea. At least in the USA, Bennett would get the patent and the invention credit, not Maddox, because Maddox did not reduce the idea to practice. Thus I think Wikipedia should credit Bennett, not Maddox, with inventing the gelatin silver process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.40.140.5 (talk) 23:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gelatin silver process. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121126063940/http://www.notesonphotographs.org/ to http://notesonphotographs.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Untitled From the Auld Pash Project by Gabe Galloway.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:51, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Maddox?

Does anyone know whether there was actually something new about Maddox's 1871 process? I've read that this would have been the first commercially viable dry plate method, but have not yet found any reliable sources that explained whether his formula contained any previously untested chemical or manipulation, nor that his article drew special attention or inspired commercial manufacturers.Joortje1 (talk) 11:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)