Thanks for the reply, clarification, and feedback.
I'm not using wet playback (I generally tend to avoid it), although I know
of quite experienced and successful engineers using it, and have been shown
by at least one of them their method that was water based.
Cutting fluid on a lathe is for lubricant and heat dissipation right?
I just know wet playback that is at least partially water based is in use
or at least has been by a portion of the folks doing transfer work, and I
wanted to breach the topic a bit from this point of view as opposed to the
lubricant point of view (even if both work?). Even possibly hear if the
folks using it might notice a bigger benefit in low humidity conditions
(winter, etc) when applying this technique or notice this characteristic in
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Steve Greene <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> I'd be concerned the water would act like "cutting fluid" on a lathe. I'd
> try it first on something where it wouldn't be a tragedy if it was damaged.
> Steve Greene
> Audiovisual Archivist
> Office of Presidential Libraries
> National Archives and Records Administration
> (301) 837-1772
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Nathan Coy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > So I've been thinking about the somewhat controversial topic of wet
> > playback as I'm working in dry conditions currently. What I am thinking
> > it usually is talked about in terms of lubrication (or it seems to me). I
> > am thinking what if it creates increased localized humidity around the
> > disc as the water evaporates reducing static charge and thus static
> > discharge from disc to stylus (and also aids in conduction of static
> > to the surrounding air). This doesn't really apply to the use of
> > wet playback clearly (unless water is a component, in which maybe it
> > does?). Has this possibility been discussed in the past (as a somewhat
> > here)? I'd be curious on respectful thoughts or experience on this.
> > While in no way a citable source in a paper this speaks to it a little:
> > The blog entry also suggests that adding something such as photo flow
> > would prevent beading would be useful (not photo flow by name, but
> > mentions "no droplets). Which the addition was mentioned in a post by Mr.
> > Pomeroy in the arsclist archives from 2008 (but I've heard it mentioned
> > many other venues also in different use situations).
> > Hope the holidays is treating everyone well.
> > Nathan Coy