Doctor/Chemist in the house?

[chris_jordan__boston_1]

Hi Folks,

 

<p>

 

I've been involved with darkroom printing for about 10 years, and I've definately developed a sensitivity to the fumes from the chemistry. It seems to be getting worse. I've improved the ventilation and started using an acid gas respirator to cut out the sulphur dioxide, and this has helped, but its still not great. Does anyone on the forum know exactly which parts of the B&W process cause the most harmful by-products, what they might be, and what exactly they do to the body? I've been suffering from light-headed dizzyness and cannot spend more than a few minutes without wearing the respirator near open trays without a reaction. I know the answer ultimately might be..."go digital", but I'm just curious what might be happening, as my heart is breaking at the thought of letting silver printing go (A personal crisis!). Any suggestions would be welcome. Thanks a lot,

 

<p>

 

Chris Jordan (Boston)

www.jordanphoto.com

[clayton_tume]

Chris

 

The main inhalation problem is sulphur dioxide from fixing baths,

it's created by thiosulphate (sodium or ammonium) decomposing after

standing for long periods. Also fixer contamination from acid stop

baths creates sulphur dioxide, for this reason I use a plain water

stop and frequently change it.

<p>

I too have suffered from chemical hypersensitivty but from a

different source, it gave me asthma and once the source was

discovered and removed I slowly recovered. It took my lungs 3 years

to recover but I could have easily become a chronic sufferer if the

right steps hadn't been taken, so you have to take this very

seriously.

<p>

I have a good book called "Health Hazards in Photography" by Susan

Shaw, 1983 ISBN 0-933286-35-X (cloth) ISBN 0-933286-37-6 (paper), the

book details chemical hazards and would be worth getting hold of if

you can.

<p>

I was given the book by a guy retiring from photography, like you he

had sensitivity problems from the fumes. After reading the book he

got an expert in to design a proper ventilation system for his

darkroom, once installed there was no fume smell and headache and

other problems never came back.

[upscan]

Chris: You have been given knowledgeable medical advice, now for some

photo thoughts. It is understandable that the artist be in love with

his art. By association he may also come to be in love with his

tools. There is the problem, the tools are not the art. I am a

chemist and not a chemophobe but I know that chemicals need to be

treated with the respect that a snake handler gives his charges. With

proper care they are OK. However there is no reason to persist when

other, wonderful and safer alternatives are making it possible to do

photography without the wet stuff. In an exhibit, looking at the

beautiful large prints from David Muench, digital became a reality

for me. All those exquisite prints were digitally processed from film

and the photographer never had to come into contact with chemicals.

Those were handled in a lab properly set up for the purpose. Lots of

people in this forum hold dearly to the old ways. They are the

soldiers that will guard the fort till the end. They distrust the new

digital world as much as people did mistrust "synthetic or

artificial" ice when refrigerators appeared in the market. But

digital and refrigerators will be around for a long time. Exploring

new ways to creativity should be a wonderful experience and may free

you from having to use things that can hurt you. Give digital a try.

If not, heed Clayton's advice. Hope you are OK and take care.

[dean_cookson]

I don't think it's a distrust of the digital world for all of us.

 

<p>

 

I'm new to both large format and darkroom work and find that I

genuinely enjoy the manual, "analog" nature of the work. I'm not

dexterous enough to draw or paint and the opportunity to create

something with my hands, through a traditional process is very

rewarding. I'm pretty sure I'm not afraid of computers though since

I pay the bills by being an engineering director at an Internet

infrastrstructure company during the day... :-)

[wayne__]

fumes? I use citric acid stop bath and have used a plain fix in the

past, which consists only of hypo and sulfite. There are no noxious

fumes with this system. I now use rapid fix(because I'm impatient)

with excellent ventilation (2 muffin fans directly in back of the fix

tray, vented directly outside, and I keep the tray covered unless my

paws are in it), but I'm ready to go back to the plain fix if I ever

need to.

 

<p>

 

I used to love chemical smells, especially acetic acid stop, but not

anymore. I also used to smoke (no more), which I think increases

sensitivity over time.

[chris_jordan__boston_2]

Thanks for the advice, so far. I am a graphic designer by day, and so

am quite familiar with the digital tools. I see their merits and am

planning to explore them in relation to my art. I was hoping this

thread wouldn't turn into the usual analog versus digital debate, no

disrespect intended. I am a fairly serious B&W printer and this problem

is causing a fair amount of distress as I am amidst sizable printing

project, getting ready for an exhibit and a few sales (smiles). I am

hoping to aleviate the problem as best as possible. I've just ordered

the Overexposure book. Thanks, Clayton for the info. Exploring new

methods is certainly a good idea, although its hard to switch

overnight, especially when one derives a good amount of enjoyment and

pride from their printing practice. Thanks again,

 

<p>

 

Chris

[clayton_tume]

Chris and others

<p>

I didn't realise but the book title was wrong!

<p>

should read

<p>

"OVEREXPOSURE Health Hazards in Photography"

<p>

Clayton

[jim_galli4]

Chris,

 

<p>

 

I'm no expert but I do understand that the human reaction to chemicals

is one that gradually gathers toxins until a threshold is reached and

once at that point, there's not much you can do besides what you're

doing. I've reached my threshold for metol and have to be very

careful at this point with contact of MQ developers.

 

<p>

 

Lloyd Erlick (Great piece about his work in PhotoTechniques) has some

interesting alternatives that might help you bypass the chems that are

irritating you. His website is one of the best I've ever discovered

and the page you want would be;

<A

HREF="http://www.heylloyd.com/technicl/plain.htm">http://www.heylloyd.

com/technicl/plain.htm</A>

 

<p>

 

Hope you can get a handle on it. Like you I'm somewhat familiar with

both venues, but for me, the computer is where I "stress/work", and

the dark room is where I relax.

[doremus_scudder1]

Before you go about trying lots of different "cures" or changing to

digital, perhaps you should spend some time isolating the exact

chemical component that you are having a reaction to. There are many

irritants and substances to which you could be having or have

developed a reaction to. If Metol is your problem, there are plenty

of developer formulas without it, if acid fumes, that can be taken

care of as well, if hydrogen sulfide gas, that too can be eliminated.

In short, diagnose before treating and don't throw the baby out with

the bath water (or the used fix!). Regards ;^D)

[steve_clark1]

Chris,

It may not be just fumes,I`ve found that a good set of tongs and thin

rubber gloves have been extremely helpful for limiting chemical

exposure. Be well.

[bill_jefferson]

Chris,

Go on line and find all the MSDS sheets for the chemicals you are

using, read them and see what u can change in your dark room now,

then take them to your doctor, they will help with you.

 

<p>

 

Bill

[scott_walton2]

Chris, Scott from Lynnfield (just north of you). Sprint Chemistry is a

bit less noxious as far as smells go. Their fixer is ammonium based and

their stop bath is buffered with vanilla and ALOT less problematic than

Kodaks! Your ventilation (hoods over the chemistry helps) should be

cranked up so you shouldn't need the respirator. You can make a vent

hood out of foamcore (better to use some form of plexiglas for

permanence) to use over your chem trays. I can send you jpegs of the

massive ones that we have at work to give you an indication of of

something you can fashion if you want.

[sandy_sorlien]

Something to remember:

 

<p>

 

If you can smell it, it is getting into your lungs.

 

<p>

 

Sincerely,

A Darkroom Hound

[upscan]

Chris et al: should mention that smell is absolutely no way to gauge

the toxicity of chemicals. Remember, Carbon Monoxide is deadly but

totally odour-free. Other substances have extremely low detection

limits as for example esters. Such substances are detectable in a

few parts per million, yet many of these esters are practically

harmless in all but very high concentrations. One example is amyl

acetate, so called banana oil. Other esters are found in fruits and

alcoholic beverages, such as wine and rum. Some substances like

acetic acid have a pungent smell and are only mild irritants at low

concentrations. "Glacial" acetic acid, i.e. the pure form on the

other hand is quite toxic and should be handled with care. However,

everytime you add vinegar to the french fries you are breathing and

consuming acetic acid. The fries probably will do you more harm.

Also, another poster made a very good point regarding the cumulative

nature of exposure. To that I would add that you can become

sensitized , i.e. allergic to a particular substance by repeated

exposure, even after there is no trace of the substance in your

body. If you have questions about chemicals, a good source of ready

reference online is the "Merck Index". There are other sources used

by professionals but I am not aware they are available online. In my

experience, toxicology is best handled by toxicologists. General

medical practitioners are less likely to help you so taking the MSDSs

to your doctor can be of value only if he/she refers you to a

toxicologist, unless of course the chemical in question is of the

garden variety. Have a healthy spring.

[doug_paramore]

Chris: Are you using enough air inlet area into your darkroom? Many

times photographers will install a good exhaust fan and then no way

for the air to get into the darkroom that the fan takes out. I found

that in my darkroom, that created a partial vaccuum that made the

fumes worse. A fresh air vent on the opposite side of the darkroom

made things much better. Also, I turn on the exhaust fan and leave

the door open for a few minutes before starting work to insure a

supply of fresh air.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

[david_lazarus]

Hi Chris,

I am air conditioning installer/contractor and I just finshed a 6'x9'

darkroom and I installed a inline fan that pulls around 150 cfm of

air. I put the vent over the sink where the fix goes and have the air

inlet coming from under the sink so the air raps around to make a air

curtain. Also there is a duct from the a/c unit that also helps move

air. It seems to be working well and there is some smell but with all

the fresh air coming in I am happy with it. If you need any help

please let me know, good luck David.

 

<p>

 

P.s. I also work with digital.

[david_willis]

Chris, you've been given good advice. It would be useful to find out

which chemicals you're sensitive to. Some chemicals are toxic and

require a long time to eliminate. For some exposures, the damage is

cumulative--adding insult to injury. Some chemicals cause

sensitivity reactions--get rid of the chemical and the reaction goes

away. It depends a great deal on the chemical, and the nature of the

reaction depends a great deal on the individual.

 

<p>

 

I used to work with an individual who was very sensitive to acetic

acid. It caused breathing problems. I found other products without

acetic acid I could use to achieve the desired results. If I needed

to work with acetic acid, I did so at night, and in the hood, after

she was gone.

 

<p>

 

As mentioned, there are ways to get around many of the smells, either

by changing chemistry or by changing ventilation. The hood idea is a

very good one. I'd start by finding the offending chemical.

 

<p>

 

Dave