I'm guessing it would be hard to tell the colors of all them purty gemstones in a dark room with only a red light.

Shifty McLiar needs a better story.

Perhaps dark rooms lock from the inside, not from the outside? But that wouldn't stop the thief from wedging the door shut with a chair or something...

Perhaps the clue is the fact that it would be hard to tell the color of a gem under a red darkroom light? But if you know the shape and/or size of the gem, then knowing the color doesn't matter.

I don't know... I can't see anything else that would be likely to be a clue. But, I don't really know a whole lot about gems or photography...

What color is an emerald in red light? Not green. All gems would be sparkling red baubles.

Also, if the thief walked in while the pictures were being developed, it would ruin the pictures. Therefore no one walked in since the pictures were completed satisfactorily.

The light that is shined on them, and some frequencies would be absorbed, based on the stone type. Shifty McShutterbug would be the only one who could tell which stone it was, unless it was cut in a unique shape.

Yep, it's the Red Green Problem.

Probably requires duct tape.

--
Ooooh! Shiny!

It is a little known fact (though Lance doubtless knows about it) that the Dvorsky Emerald was not named for its original owner (a Russian named McGotrocksky), but for the Dvorsky Settlement through which his ex-wife acquired it.

So famed photographer Minolta McKodak takes the gems into the darkroom for some unexplained reason? Or he photographs things in the darkroom? And that valuable a bunch of gems is just laid out with no security? And one can open the door without letting in any light? And the thief took the time to pick out one gem instead of taking the whole bunch? Sheesh...

What happened to Old Jimmy Olsen's nose in the final frame? He suddenly looks like something from the Island of Dr. Moreau!

As to the intruder's entrance ruining the pix, I suppose that could happen. But many darkrooms are built in such a way that light won't get in when the door is opened. Either they have two doors, or the door is around a corner, so light won't accidentally leak in.

I think it's that the red light changed the color, so the supposed intruder wouldn't be able to tell which stone it was.

I think it ought to be the nonexposed negatives, but probably will be the red light making it hard to pick out the stone. Of course, Minolta (trying to swipe the emerald for his hoochie-koochie gal, Doris O'Razz) may have had the emerald in its own box marked "REALLY BIG-TIME VALUABLE EMERALD." Wouldn't Lance be redfaced!

Note to miscreants: Never, ever falsify a robbery in a darkroom. There's just too many ways for your story to develop incorrectly.
(Sorry about that.)

My first thought was actually the door opening when the thief barged in. If the room that leads to the darkroom was dark enough to not effect the photos, then how did the thief find the door? Or is there a dark-room light in that room too?
The whole jewel id / red light thing sounds pretty good though too.
As usual not really enough information for the average person. But luckly Lance Lawson in no average man!

Some comments above pointed out something I missed before... This must be the most polite and thoughtful thief of all time. Not only did he have the courtesy to keep the light off, but he even left $100,000 worth of gems behind in favor of the one big one. Most thieves would grab the whole bunch and sort them out later, but this guy must have been working for someone, with very specific instructions to steal ONLY that one gem, and to make sure not to screw up the photographer's negatives. Must be part of some kind of prank...

Of course there is no thief. But if there was, it would be pretty peculiar that he was so kind about it. "Pardon me, good sir, would you be so kind as to hand over that big emerald you have? ... No? Oh bloody 'ell, I'll get it meself... It's this big one, right? Christ, they all look the same in 'ere. Do you mind if I turn on the light? Oh, right, the negatives. Rightie-oh. Ah, I think this one is the little bugger. Right, I'll be on my way then, sorry to interrupt your work. Oh, and I hope you don't mind, I'm going to lock you in here. This room isn't airtight, is it? No worries, I'll phone inspector Lawson and let him know you're trapped in here. Jolly good then. Ta-ta!"

(For some reason, the imaginary super-polite thief is British...)

How'd Lance find out that Minolta was locked in? Is there a phone in the darkroom?

And good point about the "thief" taking just one stone. Man, these crooks get dumber every day.

How did Thiefy McDarkroom know the emerald was stolen when there was only a redlight on, which would wash out the colors. Or that the alleged thief knew which one to steal.

So you break into a room to steal gems, but you don't want to wreck the negatives by turning the light on?

1st Woman: "Why, what a beautiful stone."

2nd Woman: "Thank you. It's the Fabulous Dvorsky Emerald. It's beautiful, but it comes with a curse."

1W: "Really? What is the curse?"

2W: "Mr. Dvorsky."

Thank you, I'll be here all week.

if you don't have a labyrinth entry to a darkroom, you have two dark curtains. pull one back, step in the corridor, when it drops, pull back the other, and enter. pull them both back, you're likely to get a tray of developer thrown on you. nasty tasting stuff, and it stains.

and yeah, color goes away under the safelight. kodak paper boxes are yellow, under yellow light, they are yellow with a dark band where the red logo is. dupont paper boxes, popular in the late 40s, were grey with a red band, they looked grey. under a red safelight, the effect reverses.

the emerald would have been black/grey under a 10Y ruby light or filter, it was the 40s standard safelight, and remained in use wherever litho high-contrast films were in use. sapphire and amythest would also have been dark grey.

the most prominent effect of red light, of course, is making the chins reach to the shins. as we can see in the artwork.

clearly an inside job. I'd lift the lighthouse on the enlarger and look in there for a little bauble, if I was Lance. bet it's only a $50,000 stone insured for double its value.
--
if this is a new economy, how come everybody wants my old-fashioned money?

"some I can't even name"

I am shocked, Lance Lawson is not a walking, breathing, encyclopedia of all that is known and he admitted it.

Note to future scammers: pick obscure gemstones.

Yeah, why the heck does he have the gemstones in the darkroom? Looks like Jimmy Corrigan in the first panel, not he smartest kid on Earth though.

Agree, red light washout.

The answer’s gotta be the red light on a green stone, which the thief “found.” Lance is working out the solution as he says, “Pretty colors though.” and is closing in with his “small red bulb in your dark room” comment.

Apparently his jaw relaxes as he gets closer to making the bust – it’s rectangular in panel 2 and rounded off in panel 3

You can't fool Lance when it comes to photography.
His collection of pictures of Lori taken with his
Kodak Brownie were valued at close to two thousand
cents.

Lance knows that no respectable thief is going to
worry about spoiling negatives. Shakey Quakeyman
must have thought Lance was a fool.

Lance really must have given Shakey the royal
stink eye in the fourth panel. I wish Norman
Hamilton could have given us a glimpse of the
Lawson Stare. Shakey's own personal Richter Scale
is off the charts.

-------------------------------------------------------

"I'll have a medium shaw and a large shank, please."
- Morgan Freeman in "The Shawshank Coupon Redemp-
tion

wellsmin, aside from the fact that your entire comment will have me cracking up the rest of the day (esp. “Shawshank Coupon Redemption), I think you’re on to something. A typical crook would flip on a light to spot what he’s looking for, and find another way to avoid being IDed.

I doubt that will appear in the O.S., however.

Maybe Lance has learned that nobody likes an insufferable know-it-all. Of course he can identify all the gems. He's just feigning ignorance.

I can't read comments while sipping on a pop. I should know that by now.

McShutterbug said he was developing pictures when he was robbed. Lance made the observation about the negatives not being ruined by the thief's entrance. Of course the negatives weren't ruined, they had already been developed. Anyone who's spent time in a darkroom knows the difference between pictures and negatives. When you're developing negatives you need complete darkness.

So who is this impostor and what has he done with the real Lance.

Wait until the guy gets to jail, where everyone will then proceed to razz him about Dvorsky.

"Let me get this straight, Ace. You had Lawson in the dark, got him to say "I don't know?" and you're still in here? You dumber than a box of rocks, or what?"

--
if this is a new economy, how come everybody wants my old-fashioned money?

there was still ortho film around in the 40s. not sensitive to red light, very very reduced sensitivity, like litho film. that's why the 10Y Wratten was the standard safelight filter until that goldarn newfangled broad-spectrum film came out.

if Cherney and Hamilton wandered down the hall to photo in the Strib to see what a photo lab looked like, there's a good chance there'd still be a bunch of ortho 4x5 sheet film about. as long as that 7-watt red bulb, or the 15-watter under the 10Y filter was the only light, you had a Helen Keller darkroom.

--
if this is a new economy, how come everybody wants my old-fashioned money?

If Cherney and Hamilton wandered down the hall to photo in the Strib to see what a photo lab looked like, there's a good chance there'd still be a bunch of precious jewels laying around. Everyone keeps their jewels in their photo labs!

Googling "cherney hamilton riviera fugitive" now.

--
if this is a new economy, how come everybody wants my old-fashioned money?

It would sure be nice to know which correct answer is the correct answer.

Nah. That's not important. It's the most entertaining answer that we yearn for. And there are a lot of them above!

Ah, I remember newspaper photo labs. Dark, hushed mysterious places. Keep out! You'll ruin everything! 

So seeing life through rose colored lenses is not what it is cracked up to be.

I love this picture of a monkey riding a dog.

http://www.startribune.com/photos/?c=y&img=M255236.JPG

In this economy it's good cheap, clean fun.

Lance did not say he didn't know, he said:
"some I can't even name"
Obviously, they are classified and he knows he cannot reveal them to the kind of people who read the comics.

they are multicolored because of deadly radiation from kryptonite

--
if this is a new economy, how come everybody wants my old-fashioned money?

...they're summa that glowing stuff from that mike hammer movie 'kiss me deadly'...

Thanks, I did not know that. Still, they did get pictures and negatives mixed up. Something we never did in the darkroom in college. Though the gems that were lying around did occasionally get in the way.

Ortho film was fascinating and significant stuff.

On the sciency side, it was another proof that Einstein was right, light is photons and not waves. All the red photons on the world could not affect ortho film, cuz they're individuals-- they could not add up like waves.

On the social side, ortho film is why B/W pictures of dames back then often portrayed their lipstick as glossy black. It wasn't, it was the film that could not record red as the proper shade of gray. They usually compensated for this in the better movies by using lighter lipstick, but all your newsreel and news photos show black lipstick.

Sorry, just getting warmed up for the Lance-O-Fest
tomorrow.

Oh, what a joyous day it will be
With Tiny and Lori and Lancey,
We'll laugh and sing and poke fun
While Dave in Arizona basks in the sun,
And we residents here in the OtherApolis
Freeze our butts and shovel snow
And wonder why it feels more like MINNEapolis!