| Author | Message | ||
  Kisha Unregistered guest |
I appreciate all of these words of encouragement. Someone, I suppose, has to play the role of canary in the coal mine. I suppose it is difficult for me to make people suddenly feel that they are harming those around them but since it is the case, I will go through with this as a "cause." The figure groups we have are quite good otherwise and I see no reason at this point to start a new one unless all else fails-- Thanks George for the Thoreau--one of the people who influenced me the most in my youth. | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 170 Registered: 10-2006 |
Kisha: I am aware of and agree with your concerns and I share them. I haven't picked up any disagreement on this site with either your concerns or your objectives. We are just getting old and cynical. I brought up lack of government concern only as an example of how large the obstacle may be. Cheers to you and I for one am willing to follow your lead. Bonnie | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, there is something to be said for asserting ones rights. “I love even to see the domestic animals reassert their native rights — any evidence that they have not wholly lost their original wild habits and vigor; as when my neighbor's cow breaks out of her pasture early in the Spring and boldly swims the river,…” - From Thoreau's "Walking" | ||
Grizrev Advanced Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 147 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, Don't capitulate. I think it is just a matter of deciding on your primary objective, then pressing on. Choosing one objective may, of course, mean that alternative objectives may not be possible, at least not at first. The first objective is broad and comprehensive. The others are more limited. When I read your posts, I see several objectives you may be considering: 1) Become an activist on a heartfelt environmental health concern, not just for your own group, but for all groups that are at risk. Somebody had to begin (perhaps at considerable risk and investment)the push to get tobacco smoke out of the general public environment. Remember how bad the air used to be on airplanes? 2) Try to get your own group to modify the environment in which you paint (an effort which would require diplomatic skills) 3) Set up an alternative workshop to provide a choice -- kind of like the person who somewhere began the organic food movement. All of these are legitimate. Just go ahead and choose. We'll cheer for you! | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
OK--I capitulated-- I see what I am up against in this battle. I thought the oil painters in my figure group ( held in a city building and sponsored by the city gov't) were exceptions but if members of this group are rallying behind their right to use turp and turpenoid (clearly labeled use adequate ventilation)in a small room with no ventilation, if members of this group are challenging my right to change this practice, then things are worse than I thought. Common sense has flow away like an extinct bird never to again to be sighted by even the most dedicated ornithologist. We have nothing more to discuss, comrades. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
"Maybe you just want a fight...make art, not war!" I suppose anytime someone stand up for themselves and not rolling over and playing dead they are the ones at fault for causing strife. I suppose if someone lit up a cigarette in an elevator and i told them to put it out, I would be the bad person, the person bringing strife to the situation. Can't we all just get along? Sure, if we all stopped doing things that harmed others. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
By the way--Why spend time blaming the government for not being friendly to the environment when fellow artists are willing to fill the air with toxic fumes? It's a crazy world. It's like whining that the Iraq war is for oil and doing nothing to curb your personal consumption. In the end, the blood is on your hands. In the end, its the artists doing the polluting of the class, not the government. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
This is not a valid counterargument, Maidensmith. The household items you mentioned do not have labeled on them :Use only with adequate ventilation." The items you mentioned are irritants. All volatile organic compounds ever tested have been show to cause cancer, brain, damage as well as kidney and liver damage whenever they have been tested with lab animals. The fact that not every volatile organic compoud (solvent)has received multimillion dollar grants to study its effect does not mean that common sense should be thrown out the window. Since all volitile organic compounds studied have been show to have similar delitirious effects and since the cans of solvents are required by law to use in adequate ventilation which means, actually, in enough ventilation (such as a laboratory hood) where THE FUMES ARE NOT BREATHED, it is flat out uniformed to argue live and let live. THE CAN SAYS USE IN ADEQUATE VENTIlATION. | ||
Maidensmith Junior Member Username: Maidensmith Post Number: 13 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, do you have carpet, pressed board, paint on your walls, chlorine cleanser, amonia-based window cleaner, etc? Irritants are everywhere, and you have to assess your sensitivity to them and act on your own. What bothers me, may not bother you. I am sensitive to the preservative in acrylics. The current government is no friend of the environment, but you can make your own decisions based on YOUR parameters. Form a new group with tighter restrictions - if I was in your town, I would welcome such a group. Maybe you just want a fight...make art, not war! | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Joe--Water is less toxic that turpentine. Also, it's easy to blame the toxicity around us on the politicians. But that's like blaming the fast food places for obesity. I blame users. The SUV drivers.It's artists who use VOC solvents in my air. While it is try that individual solvents haven't all received the scientific studies to categorically determine carcinogenicity, Volatile Organic compounds (VOC) as a class have been thoroughly proven to be carcinogenic and VOC's all have similar effects on animal tissue. Thus to argue that solvents are not toxic while one's right, is a no starter. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Yes. But that's not the issue here. I wish I could walk into these sessions and just suggest these people buy all new materials. Won't happen. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
I’ve only read a few posts on this thread, and I’m sure I’ve missed a great deal of the discussion, so if someone has already suggested this then just ignore me, but isn’t water soluble oil paints the answer to the toxic fumes? Clean up is with water. | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 93 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, admittedly, this is not the site for politics, BUT, the current administrations of this country, and here in Florida, have packed the courts with 'conservative' judges, and I don't mean as in 'conservation'. I doubt that you will even get an interested ear. Do your own green and make a buck while you're at it. It's the american way, and impresses the heck out of the blue state boys. Gary | ||
Joe Junior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 25 Registered: 2-2007 |
Kisha "green" is very big now and going to get bigger. Why don't you do as suggested and organize your own workshops. Advertise them as a "green" and healthier place to be. I use to redo antiques and once called a manufacturer about a warning on a can of stripper. It said, " use with adequate ventilation". So I ask what adequate ventilation was. The company chemist's reply was I had to move several hundred square feet of air per minute. I said you mean work outdoors with a fan blowing over it. Yes, essentially, was his response. I ask how his company got away with it and he said it was all the law required. When you went into the health warnings they were somewhat vaque yet scary if you understood what you were reading. I really think you should try the green thing. By the way, watercolor is no less toxic than oils. They all use the same pigments. | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 169 Registered: 10-2006 |
Kisha: Every day we are exposed to government permitted air emissions that saturate every breath we take. They even reach supposedly pristine wilderness areas. Every day we are exposed to pesticides in our water and food, no matter how hard we attempt to limit exposure. We live in a society of "beliefs." To hell with the facts. And as long as the exposers can sell the majority of the exposees the "belief" that these chemicals are harmless, we get our daily cancer causing chemical exposure along with everyone else. I hate to be so cynical but it comes from experience. Before you go too far out on a limb in your local community, you should probably see "An Unreasonable Man." I haven't seen it yet, but from what I've read, it should elighten some on what happens when you expose the emperor. | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 92 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, again just to play "devil's advocate" here, if the dangers of the solvents are "unknown" as you worded it, it is hard to prove a danger! I think that you are basically in the right for wanting a toxin free environment in a workshop that is not specifically an "oil" workshop, but I think that you have a long, and probably mean, road ahead of you. I think that organizing clean and green workshops from the gitgo is a smoother and faster and more likely of success path to follow. Gary | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
We'll never know because I'm not going to research the scientific journals to find out. So what about a more direct approach. The cans of solvents all say--MUST BE USED WITH ADEQUATE VENTILATION. Since the studios in question have no ventilation, it is a no-brainer that these artists are using their solvents inconsistently with manufacturers warnings and in so doing are exposing the rest of us to unknown risks. This seems to be an incontrovertible argument. | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 91 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, I doubt that you can prove that there is more danger from the fumes in an oil painting class than from second hand smoke. I don't think that you can support your position scientifically. I may be wrong, but there has not been a 'critical mass' of data to support that. I also don't think that OSHA rules apply in a non-industrial setting. (Except, perhaps to the actual employees at the center where the class is being held.) Gary | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I have already tried one on one reasoning with no results--everyone has a live and let live attitude except me. I have a don't poison my air with your toxins attitude. I will win this but won;t show my face afterward so it will be a pyhrric victory, but maybe in the long run the issue will take root just as the gradual banning of smoking (a far less dangerous toxin than solvent fumes) in public spaces. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Peanut butter is not poisonous to all--toxic fumes are. Toxic fumes damage the mucosa of the lungs and airway of everyone. It is more like banning second hand smoke. Looked at objectively, nowhere else would this be tolerated. It would not be tolerated if I had an open paint bucket filled with a solvent in an sort of of public space other than an art space. It is no less toxic being in an art space, Bottom line --it is violation of OSHA guidelines, ie., against the law. A law designed to protect us all from damage by voliile organic compounds. | ||
Joe Junior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 24 Registered: 2-2007 |
I hope he also cleaned his brushes in turps afterward as kerosene leaves an oil film on the brusehes which is not conducive to longevity. By the way I am a fan of Paul Strisik. Kisha I think gary is giving you sound advice. Seek compromise first. A person can never have too many friends and enemies are easy to come by. | ||
Eugene Senior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 209 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, I think Gary is giving sound advice. Oil painters have been using turps and other "toxic" solvents forever. They know the risks and will continue to use them. It's their choice, not yours. Another question. I knew a well known New England painter,Paul Strisick, (deceased, natural causes). He used kerosene to clean his brushes, is this toxic too? | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 90 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, I don't understand your anger at the situation, if you haven't yet asked for a solvent free opportunity to attend the classes. Your solution of having all classes turned into solvent free venues is not different than schools that have banned peanut butter for the sake of the rare possibility of a peanut allergy. Not everyone is a chemical sensitive and you are going to be fighting against the entrenched interests of the classics. I don't advise it. I do recommend that you seek an alternative solution and requesting that SOME of the classes be solvent free is a reasonable approach. You have been getting increasingly strident in your (written) tone (no verbal cues here) and I wonder if that is a result of frustration over the issue or our suggestions. Try the "middle path" and seek a less confrontational approach. (Tell me to shut the heck up if you need to!) Gary | ||
Maidensmith Junior Member Username: Maidensmith Post Number: 12 Registered: 8-2006 |
How about starting a "solvent-free" class? Notifying OSHA seems like a drastic step and won't win you acceptance in your class. So you might as well move on. All of this negative energy will just hold you back in your art. | ||
Rekha Advanced Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 192 Registered: 8-2006 |
You would be making a legitimate complaint to the authorities who run the programme you attend, so there would be no reason for you to withdraw from the programme. Stick to your principles | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Rekha--the discussion at the link provided me with an idea. Since the classes I attend are through the city parks department, I could file a complaint with OSHA to get the use of solvents stopped in the classes. I wouldn't be able to show my face but a bigger issue would be resolved. I passionately feel that oil painters have no right to expose the rest of us to their highly toxic solvent fumes (esp. in a tax payer payed for setting) and I don't give a damn about the accepted nature of oil paint in artistic venues. It is a clear case of second hand poisonous fumes and i have a right not to be poisoned in a public space. This is a definitive solution and i thank you. | ||
Joe Junior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 23 Registered: 2-2007 |
Kisha it DOES NOT smell like lavender and it is NOT TOXIC. It smells wonderful. Like nothing I had smelled before. | ||
Rekha Advanced Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 191 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, perhaps you could raise further awareness at a national standard in where else but the American Artist. See http://www.myamericanartist.com/2007/02/technical_qa_sa.html | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I certainly would be nice if the studios smelled of lavender rather than turpentine. I like the recollections turpentine brings when I smell it--the days of my youth painting in oils--but I don't want the health problems it may cause. | ||
Joe Junior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 19 Registered: 2-2007 |
Limonene is not good for artists. The fumes as well as the lack of chemical interaction in mediums. Spike is the best bet. You have a point about changing artists. A lot of them are worse than old dogs. Just thought it might help. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I am not sure I could convert the oil painters at the figure sessions, specifically, into using oil of spike because they would have to agree to order it, pay for it, change their brush cleaning habits, etc. I think for that specific issue it is too big of a hurdle. It is, however, a rather interesting solution theoretically. I suppose if I painted in oil I would try it. There;s still the solvent issue at the end of the day. (Soap and water never got my brushes as clean as I needed). Also what about those painters who work large, with knives, or who work big. The cost would rise sharply, I'm a afraid. What about limonene? Some mediums are based on that. Are fumes from that toxic? | ||
Joe Junior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 16 Registered: 2-2007 |
It runs $4.00 an ounce at iconofile. Do a search and see if is cheaper somewhere else. I probably don't use a pint a year. All of the chemical actions you would use it in are better. No I wouldn't gargle with it but there are a lot of other things I wouldn't gargle with either. Like Perfume for starters. Do not use it for brush cleaner because it is too pricy. Use more brushes and use soap and water for clean up. Actually turps is good for clean up and then soap and water. Clean up being when you are done at the end of the day. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Lavender (spike) oil is outrageously expensive. How could one employ it as a turpentine substitute without being an heir to the walmart fortune? It runs about 10 bucks per ounce. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I was referring to Euegne's comment that basically drew a distinction between those allegic to fumes and those not. My point was that toxity is bad for everyone and is not a matter of allergies. It's hard to know if a volatile organic solvent of any sort is safe, BTW. Would you gargle with oil of spike? | ||
Grizrev Advanced Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 113 Registered: 8-2006 |
Joe, I know that's your belief and experience, but do you know of any independent, preferably scientific, analysis that has been done on oil of spike? Does it work just as well as the more traditional solvents? | ||
Joe Junior Member Username: Joe Post Number: 14 Registered: 2-2007 |
Grizrev the allergy issue was raised by garydoc. It is non-toxic. If you paint in oil you really should at least try oil of spike. Kisha this is not a petroleum product nor is it a form of turps. It is a non-toxic solvent that really should cause you no harm. I have used it for several years now and find it is my solvent of choice in most mixes and mediums. It is a bit pricy to use as a brush cleaner but a few extra brushes and a little soap and water solves that. You can buy it at Iconofile.com if CJs doesn't have it. | ||
Grizrev Advanced Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 108 Registered: 8-2006 |
Has anyone seen research on the oil of spike Joe mentions, as to its toxicity? | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I don't think "allergies" is an issue at all. Toxic is toxic. Organic solvents hitting the mucosa of the throat, tongue, and lungs is damaging to all , not just to a hypothetical allergic minority. Gasoline and human lungs do not mix! | ||
Eugene Senior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 201 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, Sorry that I keep calling you Krisha, I'll try to do better in the future | ||
Eugene Advanced Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 200 Registered: 8-2006 |
Gary, I agree that Krisha should start a fume free group. I think she should do this rather than try to change the old one. Sounds like these are oldtimers who are not about to accept the views of a newcomer. it would be a lost battle that would only cause hard feelings. | ||
Joe New member Username: Joe Post Number: 7 Registered: 2-2007 |
Eugene this is not something to be allergic to. Also it is non-toxic. Try it. | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 89 Registered: 8-2006 |
Eugene, a very realistic approach, indeed. However, I still think Kisha needs to try to arrange a 'fume-free' workshop with a compatible group. Altho' I love the smell of turps and linseed, I can admit that others might not. In a more perfect world, there is room for workshops for oils and workshops for clean air. Gary | ||
Eugene Advanced Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 199 Registered: 8-2006 |
I think that if you are allergic to fumes and solvents you must just learn to avoid them or accept them as one of the dangers of being an artist. -- just as I, as a nature lover, avoid poison ivy. Because *I* don’t want to be around toxic fumes, I have no right to expect everyone else to stop using turps, pastels or fixatives. If they are so terribly dangerous and life threatening, how come there are still so many oil painters around? I, personally, don’t think they present nearly the threat as that of riding in a car. | ||
Joe New member Username: Joe Post Number: 5 Registered: 2-2007 |
From studio products-oil of spike-Natural, non-toxic substitute for turpentine that is becoming increasingly hard-to-find Delightful smell! Superior solvent action. Improves handling. Goes a long way. It is a weed that is a distant cousin of lavender. Does not smell or resemble lavender in any way. Have you tried it? smelled it? If it doesn't bother me it will more than likely not bother anyone else. I have never heard of it bothering anyone else either. Great product and does all it says. Try it. | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 88 Registered: 8-2006 |
Joe, unfortunately lavender oil is highly irritating to some (allergenic) and to some people smells worse than industrial turps! It has also been shown recently to be estrogenic and possibly anti-testosteronic which means femininization of males exposed to it long term. There are NO benign chemicals, only a relative continuum that differs for everyone! Gary | ||
Joe New member Username: Joe Post Number: 3 Registered: 2-2007 |
Turpenoid is toxic. Just because you can't smell it does not mean it is not toxic. Reccomend oil of spike as a substitute for the turpenoid. It is a distant cousin of lavender, a wonderful solvent, non-toxic and smells like heaven. A search on the net will find it. Take a bottle to class and ask them to try it. It will sell itself. If they refuse, just open it up and pass it around for all to smell. They can bring a few extra brushes and clean up with soap and water afterwards. With a little co-operation by everyone it should solve your problem. | ||
Joe New member Username: Joe Post Number: 2 Registered: 2-2007 |
Not interested in a possible solution? | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Thanks for the great suggestions. I pay 5 bucks a session. 90% of the artists use charcoal. A couple use oils. I've spoken individually with people and they seem concerned about my comments and then just go back to painting. My impression is that there is a disconnect between the fact that fumes are toxic and concern for their own health. they don;t want the hassle. These are all public sessions. One sponsored by the umbrella art group of the whole city, 2 others sponsored by the city parks department. I like painting the models who chow up and i like the people--even the oil painters--and I really resent the poisoning of the air. Our city has a ban on smoking in any public places such as restaurants or offices. I would think solvents are a million times worse. I suppose if I am going to have to leave these groups, I should do the others a favor and raise the issue loudly enough to realize their heath is at risk. Perhaps I should find studies that confirm this and distribute them at the sessions. | ||
Eugene Advanced Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 197 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kiska, Have you been diplomatic abut asking for the change ? Sounds to me like this is a established old class and you are the newcomer. These old timers are stubborn and most be persuaded gently to change. You said you just packed up your things and left. That doesn’t sound like the way to do it. Do you pay for these sessions? Are there any rules or guidelines? Most workshops I go to do not allow fixatives or smelly substances n the classroom. Aren’t there any others in the class who will support you? There is power in numbers-- you can’t fight the group alone. If you are paying you might have some rights, if it’s free, you may have to go with the flow. I suggest you find a toxic free class instead of a fight. If these folks have not welcomed your suggestions they are not going to change. Let them perish in their own toxic fumes. I’ve been handicapped for some years and accept the fact. I’ve learned not to expect anyone to change habits or lifestyles to accommodate my hardships. Start a class of your own. | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 87 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, that's what I'm suggesting too! Get the sponsors of the current classes to "see the light" and start an environmentally green class without noxious fumes or dust. There might be a great response. Gary | ||
Maidensmith Junior Member Username: Maidensmith Post Number: 11 Registered: 8-2006 |
I am very sensitive to solvents and it does prevent me from taking part in groups where they are used. However, I have found that watercolor classes and plein air (weather permitting) with a group is fine - I keep my distance. What would happen if you started a group that was "solvent-free"? You might be surprised how many come out of their studios to join you! | ||
Joe New member Username: Joe Post Number: 1 Registered: 2-2007 |
There are several alternatives to using solvents that offend. What are they using the turpenoid for? Is there another room with better ventilation? Are you paying for this? | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
A gas mask is actually a good idea. I don't think I can change things because artists are used to painting in classes and open studios where oil paint--the gold standard of the art world--is used. It's perceived as almost a sacred right to paint in oils. Most people seem to have the attitude of --it won't hurt me--it'll be the next guy. I won't be the one to get cancer. However, there are many levels of being affected, many probably subclinical. I can either go on a crusade and in the end still not be able to attend because I will lose for sure, or I can give up and save the energy. It would be nice if a movement started to ban oil solvents in public studios--everywhere. That would take a concerted effort of a lot of people saying "I ain't gonna take this lying down anymore." So thanks for letting me vent a little here. Marie, since you are a regular at life drawing sessions, how do you weigh in on this issue? | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 86 Registered: 8-2006 |
You can show up with a gas mask (for theatrical effect!) Seriously, I suggest a formal letter to the sponsor/organizer of classes to request a session devoted to "green" painting to eliminate the risk of toxin exposure. It could be promoted profitably, perhaps. (You have to SELL it!) Gary | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
This effectively eliminates my participation in any of the 5 life drawing sessions in town. The underlying issue for me, do a couple of oil painters have the right to do this? It is like second hand smoke in that regard. Why should I have to face a choice between non participation or exposure to extreme toxins? How would you approach making this an issue if you wanted to participate in life classes, given that EVERYONE else will support the oil painters since they happen to be the leaders of artistic community -- the life drawing teachers etc. I don;t want to go away quietly because it is essentially wrong, though passively so, for others to have to choose severe risk or non=participation. Also, Eugene, it is great you have lived heathy so long--more decades for you. However, since it is a scientific fact that Volatile Organic Compounds are an extreme health risk, you comment only shows that you have evidently been spared. That says little for the rest of us. | ||
Garydoc Intermediate Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 85 Registered: 8-2006 |
All organic solvents say on the label to: "use in a well ventilated area" and they're not kidding. I paint oils and know that I'm exposing myself to those fumes, and do so knowingly. If one is sensitive to the fumes, has concerns about exposure, then that person has no choice but to avoid those places/workshops where oil solvents will be used. A funny point is: some think that walnut oil based paints are less toxic than linseed oil based paints. It ain't so! The drying oils ARE NOT toxic in themselves. It is the solvents that are toxic. Only water-soluble oils can be non-toxic, and only if they are thinned/cleaned with nothing but soap and water! If the coordinator of your sessions is an oil painter, and deaf to your requests, then you will have to find a different group that prohibits oil solvents and uses only water-soluble oils and other (non-fumy)media. By the way second hand pastel dust is probably more toxic than some of the organic solvents! Gary | ||
Eugene Advanced Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 196 Registered: 8-2006 |
I sort of like the smell of turps. It's like artist's perfume, an odor of the trade, Just as the smell of wood savings is to a carpenter. I'm sure some folks are more sensitive than others. You may have to give up the class. I'm an octogenarian, and have been exposed to second hand fumes and smoke all my life. Guess I'm just a tough old bird. | ||
Grizrev Intermediate Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 91 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kisha, This is why we are watercolorists! Stay away from those oil painters!  | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I have what I suppose is an ettiquite question. I attend several life drawing classes each week. Usually there are about 15 sketchers (charcoal, graphite, conte etc), one or two watercolorists (me included) and then a couple of oil painters. I have noticed that if I come in late, or leave the room for awhile and then return that the room is filled with the smell of solvent fumes. I have mentioned it a couple of oil painters and their reply was that they use turpenoid so no problem. I researched turpenoid and it is naptha which is as toxic as turpentine. My concern is cancer, lung, liver, and kidney damage. We are so cautious in our lives about second hand cigarette smoke but these second hand fumes seem a million times more letha. I've had individual conversations with other participants suggestion this toxicity is a danger but they all humor me long enough to "get away fro the kook. No one but me seems to care. I have begun packing up and leaving every time an oil painter begins painting, sometimes letting the coordinator of the sessions (an oil painter) know why. I get no response on this. Thus I am deciding to spend my time painting landscapes. Please please comment on this issue and please put yourself in my shoes and the shoes of the typical artists who accepts solvent in unventilated places as part of art making. |
