Part 550: The Phobias of Dry Pigment and Aniline Dye – Second of Three Parts
During the first decade of the twentieth century, much traveling scenery was created with aniline dye, allowing drops to be easily folded and packed in a trunk. This process ensured that the painted composition would not crack or dust off during transit and repeated use.
Dye drops were lighter and far easier to handle, perfect for tent shows, midway amusements, circuses, and vaudeville troupes. The vibrant colors of aniline dye also worked beautifully for certain stage effects, translucencies and stained glass. All you needed to mix it with gum arabic, or a similar binder, and it provided maximum adhesion and minimal bleeding of color. However, just like any chemistry project, you had to get the binder/water/dye ratios correct. For inking in charcoal lines, aniline dye was used with a little bit of shellac. Aniline dye was a wonderful and versatile “go-to” product for painting and staining.
Fast-forward eighty years to the 1980s. Aniline dye was still used in some paint shops, and for more than just translucent effects. The dye was used to brightened paint colors, especially when some pre-mix batches began appearing lackluster and dull. A good dollop of aniline dye dumped into a five-gallon bucket of paint made most drab colors bright and beautiful. But this colorful additive did not necessarily make everyone grab a pair of gloves to prevent the paint from staining their hands, or threatening their health. This was not an anomaly, as the handling of aniline dye was different then; previous generations of scenic artists broke up clumps of aniline dye with their bare hands, not fully understanding the health hazards. We were just starting to acknowledge some dangers in our industry. I doubt that any of these scenic artists were trying to be irresponsible or dangerous to others; they simply didn’t have all of the facts to properly handle the product.
As a parallel topic, there were prolonged debates about cutting Styrofoam with a hot wire. Some of my colleagues insisted it was perfectly safe, while others were adamant that it was an incredibly dangerous process. I then also think about the debates concerning the dangers of smoking and second-hand smoke – dangerous or not? We now know the science. It takes time to identify health concerns and disseminate the information to the general public. It takes time to establish and implement proper safeguards. In many cases, something has to happen for a safety warning to be included on a label – or a warning label to go on a product at all. Whether it is a problem documented during the testing of animals, or problems identified among a group of users, a consensus is reached to prior to adding a warning. For scenic artists there can be a long list of health concerns. Some are extremely hard to diagnose if the majority of users also smoke and are exposed to other airborne toxins.
So lets consider how an industry implements changes in handling procedures or identifies alternative products. Is it simply easier for us to distance ourselves from a controversial product that has been used for decades? How does that compare with trying to raise awareness about how to safely handle this product? These discussions become complicated if some belittle those addressing health concerns. Regardless, we now fully understand the necessary for safety precautions that must be in place when handling aniline dye. Has this information arrived too late? Why are some toxic paints acceptable and others not? Aniline dye is still readily available and actively sought out by woodworkers, leatherworkers and other artisans, just not scenic artists. Why?
It is understandable that we constantly seek safer products, especially in lieu of altering our handling methods for a familiar product. Are the new products really safer, or are we once unaware of the hidden dangers once again?
It takes decades of use and generations of artists to identify certain problems or health hazards associated with a particular product. New products simply can’t enter the market place with every danger being known. One example is the popular alternative to aniline dye – thinned supersaturated paint. This switch seems completely reasonable, and far safer. But what if we are unfamiliar with all of the ingredients and take very little care in the handling of this seemingly safe water-based product?
As an artists I read the safety data sheets (SDS). However, it is difficult to read it more than once, beyond that first time prior to handling a new product. It is difficult to continue examining information on updated SDS prior to every use, especially after our initial investigation; certainly when we have limited time and/or are freelancing where this research occurs on our own dime. Regardless, we must remember that many paint formulas change. Cheaper pigments are discovered or other ingredients are added to increase overall flexibility and shelf life. Changes also occur to a formula based on increasing the profit margin. This practice is not unusual and occurs in many other manufacturing industries. However, as scenic artists, we must look beyond the subtle color shifts in new batches of paint.
We must read, and re-read, every SDS each time we handle the product, even if we have been using this same product for years. We must also remember that even when paint formulas remain consistent, acceptable exposure levels could change; new information may come to light. When was the last time that you looked at an SDS for a product that you have used for over a decade? Look one up online and read it again.
To be continued…
