Tony

A

Antonyjohnbrown

Suspended / Banned
Messages
11
Name
Tony
Edit My Images
Yes
On environmental grounds alone [the most important today], there is surely no excuse for pursuing old chemical photography. Fortunately the big commercial labs are long gone. Tony :suspect:
 
Really?
 
Antonyjohnbrown said:
On environmental grounds alone [the most important today], there is surely no excuse for pursuing old chemical photography. Fortunately the big commercial labs are long gone. Tony :suspect:
Click to expand...

what

the big labs are still there, I developed some slides last night, and I don't give a **** about what you think ;)
 
Tony, I think you will find that an objective examination of actual facts will reveal that the production of a lifetimes chemistry, film and paper is far less harmful to the environment than the production of a lifetimes suply of new imaging sensors, processors, batteries, lenses with exotic elements, new plastic for camera bodies, new computers, new TFT monitors, energy production to power all the electronic gear, as well as inkjet ink for any printed material

Further, if you choose to host you 8 gazillion photos you can now take "for free" their is the massive electricity cost of the servers on which they are held.

To say that chemical photography is irresponsible from and environmental POV is ignorance, of the same kind that touts the Prius as an environmentally friendly car and current electric powered vehicles as environmentally friendly cars. Nearly all energy available today is created in an environmentally damaging way, whether coal or gas burning, nuclear, wind (made with steel which is massively environmentally damaging), solar with a large initial energy demand in the production of photovoltaic cells, or some other energy production method which ultimately boils down to envirnmentally damaging practices.

Until fusion is commercially possible, you will not be able to produce electricity in a truly environmentally friendly way, and ultimately everything needs or uses electricity somewhere in its llife cycle.

Please, by all means attempt to enter a proper discussion of facts, but no-one likes a troll


Disclaimer: this is all my opinion, I am generally in favour of pro-environmental attempts, but I also have a dislike of idiots
 
Antonyjohnbrown said:
On environmental grounds alone [the most important today], there is surely no excuse for pursuing old chemical photography. Fortunately the big commercial labs are long gone. Tony :suspect:
Click to expand...

My god you're right!

From now on I shall use only cameras built out of recycleable materials and constructed in factories that emit no waste - following an R&D process which left no carbon footprint.

Oh and that arrived in this country borne by migrating birds.
 
Antonyjohnbrown said:
On environmental grounds alone [the most important today], there is surely no excuse for pursuing old chemical photography. Fortunately the big commercial labs are long gone. Tony :suspect:
Click to expand...

Well Ilford's in-house processing labs (black & white) are busier now than ever, so big commercial labs certainly haven't gone. Plus I have it on good authority that they're selling more films and chemistry/paper now than they were four or five years ago, so clearly there is still a demand for home processing as well.

As for environmental issues, well if we stopped everything which may cause harm to the environment, we'd still be living in caves. In any case, some government 'official' can claim something is harmful just as an excuse to put a tax on it. I for one will certainly carry on film processing as long as I can still purchase chemistry.
 
Antonyjohnbrown said:
On environmental grounds alone [the most important today], there is surely no excuse for pursuing old chemical photography. Fortunately the big commercial labs are long gone. Tony :suspect:
Click to expand...

What a load of old tosh :thumbsdown: just because you don't want to dev & print your own masterpieces you think that nobody else should !!!!

Toonie
 
Antonyjohnbrown said:
On environmental grounds alone [the most important today], there is surely no excuse for pursuing old chemical photography. Fortunately the big commercial labs are long gone. Tony :suspect:
Click to expand...

Rubbish

I've just bought all the gear to start developing my own film
 
Looks like there's a new troll in town. What a tool.
 
On environmental grounds alone [the most important today], there is surely no excuse for pursuing old chemical photography. Fortunately the big commercial labs are long gone. Tony
Click to expand...

Yes , yes, you are of course right I resume that you are still using a your 286 computer and windows 98 :lol:

No, did not think so , I wonder how many of your old computers are propping up landfill sites ?

Truth of the matter is that film laboritories were very enviromentaly friendly, they recycled silver and re used chemicals.
 
gingerjon said:
My god you're right!

From now on I shall use only cameras built out of recycleable materials and constructed in factories that emit no waste - following an R&D process which left no carbon footprint.

Oh and that arrived in this country borne by migrating birds.
Click to expand...

Ooh Ohh! I want one too! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top