It's drawing quite a long bow to suggest that Ilfochrome is easy to deal with. It's not. Never was.
Ilfochrome is terrible compared to hybrid methods — believe me, photographers in Australia turned away from it in droves and either went all-digital or hybridised (as I did). People need to realise how restrictive Ilfochrome Classic media is in terms of contrast (it's blessing, as well as its curse); trannies must be nailed precisely in terms of exposure with neither highlights or shadows at the margin; this isn't impossible of course, but many opportunities are lost because the contrast range (just two variations) is so narrow and tempestuous to cope with e.g. contrasty scenes shot on Velvia.
I never liked the RA-4 process from Velvia (or just about anything else at the time), that's why I went to Ilfochrome from 1994 (to 2010): while we had the Master Printers, and knew how to tailor Velvia to the finished print, it was great, but extremely expensive; customers ranted and raved over the brilliant hues of desert-scapes, ephemeral abstracts and scenes of the typical Australian outback. Things started unravelling for everybody because the manufacturer of Ilfochrome was so tardy, quality control dropped, raw materials skyrocketed, frieight was unreliable and the delivered batches were often damaged or faulty. So Ilfochrome lost a big chunk of the customer base not because it was hitherto unaffordable, but because it became unreliable in terms of quality and procurement. For those with less demanding needs in colour printing RA-4 is just about the only method available to you.
The Ilfochrome bleach is toxic and usually requires specific treatment before discharge e.g. in drains. The lab where I had my prints made had an exotic waste treatment facility to comply with EPA standards as the lab was smack-bang in the middle of residential suburbia and early odours coming out of the place caused a few stirs.