Talk:Collodion-albumen process

A version of this article was wikified by Nolelover, a member of WikiProject Wikify, on October 6, 2010. The project welcomes all editors with a good grasp of wiki markup to help improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please ask at our talk page.WikifyWikipedia:WIKITemplate:WikiProject WikifyWikify articles

Photography

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Merging

This could be merged to Collodion, but that could make it confusing. While the collodion process was a established technique for almost a century the Collodion-Albumen process was but a footnote in the history of photography. If at all we should see if it could be merged to dry plate Alf^Photoman 12:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I think what would be best is a separate section on the various printing processes that were used with it over time. This would have a couple of "main article" links with a short overview in the article itself. I guess the problem I have with this article is that it's not really a process on itself, but two separate ones that already have their own articles that are higher quality than this one. Maury 14:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are really three processes, both the method and the result are highly divergent from the Albumen and Collodion processes as is the chemistry involved (for which we would really need a chemist to explain, I know the rudiment's as most photographers but could not go into detail) Alf^Photoman 14:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Inaccuracy

The article states that the speed of the plate is approximately 1 or .5 ISO. This is significantly off from correct;dry plates were much slower than wet plates (the article says (1/4) of the speed), and wet plates aren't anywhere close to even .5 ISO. I doubt that a reasonable ISO number could be derived from the speed of the plates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.41.190 (talk) 17:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]