[alt-photo] Re: Pt/Pd printing Video

[Paul Viapiano]

I call bullshit on Mike Ware...

If you care of stewardship for the land, you will make the small effort to 
bring your waste, however minute or dilute you may think it is, to a local 
toxic disposal center. Or you can always evaporate the water from a 
dichromated solution and make it easier to dispose of in a proper manner.

Judy, I've heard you tell this stort before and I don't doubt it, but that 
type of cavalier attitude by the "captain" is exactly what's wrong with so 
many "experts".

Be on the safe side, care about where you live, do the right thing. Period.

Paul


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel at panix.com>
To: "The alternative photographic processes mailing list" 
<alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 11:38 AM
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Pt/Pd printing Video


>
> Aside from Diana's very cogent points is perhaps the fact that, presumably 
> at least, world supply of platinum is finite, perhaps diminished enough to 
> justify the cost....  Then think how much of the remaining supply gets 
> flushed down the drain in making a print.  (Does anyone feel guilty 
> yet???) And what if it's a really STUPID print?  (OK, I won't go there.)
>
> As I understand it, dichromate, on the other hand, is made from plentiful 
> chemicals... The evil there, of course, is poisoning by way of the runoff 
> water... Tho I recall Mike Ware's explanation that in a large body of 
> water, the dichromate breaks down into a relatively harmless 3rd party of 
> some sort, and I was assured by the water department in NYC that the 
> amounts I (and all my students at the time) used were trivial (he actually 
> laughed) -- in a city where 7 million (or like that) toilets flush every 
> minute.
>
> (The "captain" asked how much we used, I estimated that my students and I 
> probably used maybe a pound a year... He said, as I recall, that they're 
> dealing with air conditioning systems that use something like a pound 
> every 45 minutes.)
>
> Where chemicals of this order would be quite serious, though, would 
> presumably be in small towns that have private ... I forget what you call 
> them: a cistern is a private well of water, the thing I'm forgetting is 
> the private waste water pit. Cess pool?  (We had one of those in the house 
> I was born in on Long Island... but I wasn't doing gum at the time.)
>
> J.
>
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Diana Bloomfield wrote:
>
>> Well, I think beginners probably should shy away from the process.  I do 
>> think pt/pd is an inordinately expensive process, and not all that 
>> satisfying, really (for me, anyway).  I stopped platinum printing, for 
>> the most part, because I never felt I could raise my prices enough to 
>> offset the costs, or to make it worth my while.  I also found most people 
>> (unless knowledgeable photographers or collectors) didn't really care 
>> about whether something was a platinum print or not, and had no idea what 
>> you were talking about when you said it was a platinum print.  You can 
>> educate people, of course, but in the end-- honestly-- I don't think 
>> anybody much cares. I've printed some of my same images in other 
>> processes, and no one was ever put off that it wasn't a platinum print. 
>> Maybe it was my printing ability (or lack of?), but I think people mostly 
>> appreciated the other processes more. It really is expensive, and heaven 
>> forbid if you're prone to making mistakes. Not that I am, of course, but 
>> I have heard that people do--you know-- make mistakes.
>>
>> Diana
>
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo