Low-tech or traditional methods don’t mean they’re inherently better for the climate or environment though. The Victorian era coal smog was very low-tech and ye

Low-tech or traditional methods don’t mean they’re inherently better for the climate or environment though. The Victorian era coal smog was very low-tech and yet we can probably agree that it would be a bad idea to return to that. like if they called it “trash-burning monthly” it wouldn’t be surprising that you open the cover and find that’s exactly what’s inside, but it’s also not a good thing to encourage even in a hobby sense, really. And there is a lot of the world that has done some pretty awful things environmentally for a very long time. If it makes you feel better I have hobbies that are environmental disasters too. I don’t feel great about the knowledge that mercury/chromium/selenium intensifier or pyrocat exist, even plain old fixer isn’t great (although people will take it since it’s full of silver and worth recovering). https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/mercury-intensifier.74486/?amp=1 https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/mercury-intensifier.74... (Mmm mercury II chloride, if you don’t have any in your medicine cabinet just pop over to the barber and ask them for a scoop, very “traditional”!) https://www.ebay.com/itm/324458861037 https://www.ebay.com/itm/324458861037 (In film, this will bind to the un-fixed silver and help pull a little more in, or even strip the fixed silver and re-precipitate another metallic salt instead. Obviously takes a pretty aggressive reducing agent to bind to precipitated noble metals, so more aggressive the action the better it works… and those agents also love to bind to your nerves. So it’s pretty much literally “the better it works the more poisonous”. Mmm, organometallic chemistry, isn’t it grand?)