Mr. Hugh Smith probably has never seen a real platinum/palladium print in his life.

As far as his statements about the "old days", poisonous salts and days for exposures, the man is either totally ignorant or has an agenda of some sort.

But ultimately I hold the editors and publishers of Photo Techniques responsible for publishing such articles without checking the accuracy of statements made by the authors.

ALL the photo magazines continue to publish articles about dgital that bash traditional methods and the authors always try to get digs in about how much better it is to be out of a cramped, smelly darkroom.

I would suggest that they are to stupid or lazy to have had a good comfortable darkroom, or are to lazy to get the maximum out of their darkroom.

I for one have quit subscribing to magazines such as Photo Techniques because of this practice. I will sit an read them at the booksotre for some articles, but they can go out of business before I give them another penny.

If an article has a good cogent argument about advantages/ disadvantages regarding certain techniques and methods, that is fine. But please, enough of trying to justify switching to digital by tearng down what others still love.