[HN Gopher] The first blue pigment discovered in 200 years is no...
___________________________________________________________________
The first blue pigment discovered in 200 years is now commercially
available
Author : uptown
Score : 312 points
Date : 2021-01-17 01:27 UTC (21 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (news.artnet.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (news.artnet.com)
| habosa wrote:
| If I was working in a lab and my experiment turned a deep blue
| I'd say "cool!" and move on. I didn't know that discovering a new
| color was something meaningful.
|
| I wonder who told these scientists "stop what you're doing you've
| just discovered a new pigment".
| newdude116 wrote:
| Do you have a chemistry background?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IG_Farben
|
| Do you know what the name means?
| Scoundreller wrote:
| One more thing for art forgers to worry about.
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| I would love to see this color in person. I had not realized it
| was such an excellent IR reflector either, from an industrial
| perspective that should be a boon for IR lamp heating systems in
| terms of efficiency.
| jakear wrote:
| Anyone here have suggestions for viewing this and other novel
| pigments?
| zokier wrote:
| I was googling around, and apparently there are some shirts
| marketed as "yinmn blue":
|
| https://www.scotch-soda.com/fi/en/men/shirts/long-sleeve-100...
|
| I am somewhat dubious though if that is genuinely yinmn, but
| interesting nevertheless that they are marketing it as such.
| AareyBaba wrote:
| You can see the blue pigment on an AMD Radeon Pro graphics
| card. https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/workstation-series
| jrockway wrote:
| I kind of thought you were kidding, because nobody on earth
| cares what color their workstation/datacenter graphics card
| is... but indeed they are using YInMn blue:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMXS1A2uBeE And made a video
| about how cool they are for putting certain paint on a
| graphics card.
|
| I will continue to be amused because people call Intel "team
| blue" and AMD "team red", but in this case AMD's product is
| blue.
| xyzzyz wrote:
| > I kind of thought you were kidding, because nobody on
| earth cares what color their workstation/datacenter
| graphics card is...
|
| I'm not sure if you're joking here or something, but as it
| turns out, many people buy video cards to play video games,
| and many of them care about how their gaming device looks
| like. They install LEDs and stuff. It's pretty cool.
| jrockway wrote:
| Radeon Pro is the professional line, for workstation use
| cases (CAD, rendering, that sort of thing). They are not
| aimed at the consumer market, and AMD doesn't appear to
| paint their consumer cards blue.
| Guthur wrote:
| True, but these are workstation cards, they're for GPGPU
| workloads or Rendering workstations for pro artist. You'd
| rarely if ever find them in a gaming PC (too expensive
| with no real benefit for gaming workloads).
| spijdar wrote:
| There are other uses, too. AMD makes low profile (?)
| radeon pro cards like the WX2100 which are smaller and
| have lower power requirements than their consumer
| offerings.
|
| I got a used one off eBay for my tower, mostly because I
| wanted something AMD for linux usage with as low heat
| emission as possible, but honestly I really like the look
| of that blue too :)
|
| Even if I have a black boxy case with no fancy windows or
| anything else... Interesting to learn it's this neat
| pigment.
| Guthur wrote:
| You might get some bargains on ebay for sure.
|
| But straight up it would make no sense for a non
| professional workload. You could get a AMD 5500 XT 4GB
| GDDR6 (WX2100 is 2GB GDDR5) for a similar ball park in
| price with 5x the bandwidth and a lot more graphical
| horse power for a gaming workload. And if heat is the
| concern it would be trivial to underclock and undervolt
| to get it quite chilly.
|
| You may have some special situation and have got a great
| deal but for the most part they should be of little
| interest to standard consumers.
| spijdar wrote:
| Looking briefly at ebay, the 5500 XT goes for around
| 250-300 USD, while the WX2100 goes for around 50-70 USD.
|
| And the 5500 XT has a TDP of 130 watts, vs 25 watts for
| the WX2100. The WX2100 is also smaller, and doesn't
| require additional power from the PSU, running entirely
| off the PCIe slot power.
|
| Not that I'm saying it's great for gaming. But I'm
| running it on a IBM POWER processor which can't really
| play x86 games anyway, just open-source and java games
| (it can tank minecraft at 4k pretty nicely). It lacks an
| on-board accelerated GPU too, so going without isn't
| really an option.
|
| I agree almost everyone should probably just get a better
| gaming card, but for the price this thing runs a 4k
| monitor great, has good video en/decoders, and a cool
| blue exterior ;)
| sharpneli wrote:
| I was on the release event of those cards. All of that
| setup just for the punchline in the end: "The first non-
| toxic blue"
|
| The fact that it was said makes the amusement value even
| greater.
| cycrutchfield wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YInMn_Blue#Commercialization_
| a...
|
| >AMD announced in July 2016 that the pigment would be used
| on new Radeon Pro WX and Pro SSG professional GPUs for the
| energy efficiency that stems from its near-infrared
| reflecting property
| londons_explore wrote:
| Except for cooling a hot thing, you _want_ a pigment that
| absorbs and radiates a lot in the far infrared (ie. acts
| like a black body)
| [deleted]
| mhh__ wrote:
| > because nobody on earth cares what color their
| workstation/datacenter graphics card is
|
| I think some HPC applications do actually have some
| aesthetics because the bean counters want to be able to
| look at their billion dollar datacenter and say "My
| datacenter is bigger/prettier than yours" rather than just
| having a black front panel.
| getpost wrote:
| "From Egyptian wall paintings to the Venetian Renaissance,
| impressionism to digital images, Philip Ball tells the
| fascinating story of how art, chemistry, and technology have
| interacted throughout the ages to render the gorgeous hues we
| admire on our walls and in our museums."
|
| Bright Earth: Art and the Invention of Color Paperback -
| Illustrated, April 15, 2003 https://www.amazon.com/Bright-Earth-
| Art-Invention-Color/dp/0...
|
| https://www.philipball.co.uk/
| qndreoi wrote:
| "YInMn Blue's appeal stems in part from its high opacity, which
| means you don't need to apply much of it to get a good coating."
|
| This! I've noticed that blue exterior house paint, even with an
| expensive primer, just doesn't cover very well. This stuff seems
| about 100 times too expensive for that application.
| alisausa wrote:
| I was a really bad girl. Punish me with your dick in my mouth. -
| https://adultlove.life
| tekkk wrote:
| These people really didnt think about how people are going to
| pronounce their pigment? YInMn - what a monster of a name. In the
| olden days at least people gave colors great names that were easy
| to prounounce and provided them personality. Ultramarine,
| prussian blue.. Even vantablack has a nice rhythm.
|
| It's nice as techinical name, I guess, but I'd hope they have
| some better brand name they are going by.
| GreenWatermelon wrote:
| I decided to pronounce it "Yelenmen"
| triclops200 wrote:
| The character after the Y in YInMn is an I (uppercase i), not
| an l.
| knuthsat wrote:
| Coming from a language with phonemic orthography it's pretty
| easy to pronounce.
| JKCalhoun wrote:
| I'll propose: _Rare Blue_.
| BossingAround wrote:
| It seems to me like it'd have a Chinese-like pronunciation,
| that is Yin Min.
|
| Tangentially, as a non-native speaker, "ultramarine" has a
| fairly similar amount of information encoded in the name as
| "Yinmn"--pretty much zero. So, the two names ("ultramarine" vs
| "yinmn") are pretty much equivalent to eme, personally.
|
| Goes to show that naming things "properly" is difficult (I
| suspect it's impossible actually).
| adrian_b wrote:
| Originally, "ultramarine" meant something like "imported
| merchandise", i.e. something brought from the other side
| (ultra-) of the sea (-marine).
|
| It provided the information that this is a foreign pigment
| that must be better than the lower-quality pigments produced
| locally (e.g. azurite).
| russellbeattie wrote:
| Crayola is calling the crayon made with this color "Bluetiful",
| does that help? Wikipedia also refers to it as "Oregon Blue,
| Mas Blue, or Yin Min Blue" so I think it will be commonly
| called something else.
|
| Anyways, you're on HN, you know geeks shouldn't name things,
| but they do anyways. Think "XBox" as a perfect example.
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| Crayola's crayon isn't actually using the YInMn pigment.
| La1n wrote:
| One of the videos in the article has it as Yin Min.
| shivamgarg19 wrote:
| Nice!
| xwdv wrote:
| I don't get it, how would you even discover a pigment? How would
| you know what you're looking at is novel?
| userbinator wrote:
| _I don't get it, how would you even discover a pigment?_
|
| I suspect it starts with "this compound has a nice colour, how
| about its other properties?"
|
| _How would you know what you're looking at is novel?_
|
| There are extensive lists of existing pigments.
| refurb wrote:
| Chemistry - either organic or inorganic. We already know what
| is responsible for the colors of molecules. So you can build
| _new_ molecule or complex based on those principles and some of
| them turn out to be scientifically interesting or commercially
| valuable.
| Pasorrijer wrote:
| I think it's possible the discoverers looked at it and said
| they had never seen such a colour before artificially
| peteretep wrote:
| Guessing if you're a chemical engineer it's one of those
| properties you're keeping an eye out for?
| krisoft wrote:
| > How would you know what you're looking at is novel?
|
| Pigments are chemicals. Chemist can use various techniques to
| analyse a sample and tell what is its composition. After that
| they search for it in the literature and if they find that the
| given chemical was not described previously then it is novel.
| That's it.
|
| > I don't get it, how would you even discover a pigment?
|
| The article answers this. " Chemist Mas Subramanian and his
| team serendipitously came upon it while conducting experiments
| with rare earth elements as part of their work with
| semiconductors."
|
| That is to say they were experimenting and something turned out
| as blue. They didn't expect this so they analyzed the sample
| and then did a literature search.
| Bud wrote:
| Read up just a little bit on art history and you'll get it.
|
| It wasn't that long ago that a blue pigment--anything at all
| that was blue and that would be durable over time--was
| extraordinarily rare and valuable.
| alisaus1 wrote:
| Top burny busty chicks only on this site! Follow the link, and
| you won't be sorry! - https://adultlove.life
| alisaus2 wrote:
| Top burny busty chicks only on this site! Follow the link, and
| you won't be sorry! - https://adultlove.life
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| Is this ok?
|
| >Yttrium is mostly dangerous in the working environment, due to
| the fact that damps and gasses can be inhaled with air. This can
| cause lung embolisms, especially during long-term exposure.
| Yttrium can also cause cancer with humans, as it enlarges the
| chances of lung cancer when it is inhaled.
|
| >Indium compounds are encountered rarely by most people. All
| indium compounds should be regarded as highly toxic. Indium
| compounds damage the heart, kidney, and liver, and may be
| teratogenic.
|
| https://www.lenntech.com/periodic/elements/y.htm
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| Cobalt is used in some colors. Many oil paints are filled with
| things that can kill you in large doses. Bob Ross likely died
| from inhaling paint thinner fumes.
|
| It just comes with the territory oddly enough...
| hwillis wrote:
| EPA thinks so
| [deleted]
| awalton wrote:
| Its oral LD50 was tested to be more than 5000mg/kg according to
| Shepherd Color Company's MSDS for Blue 10G513 (as it is known
| commercially). That's well into "non-toxic" as categorized by
| the EPA. For perspective, that's more than ten times less toxic
| than caffeine.
|
| So, probably pretty safe when used appropriately. I wouldn't go
| inhaling it, since any fine powder's not great for the lungs,
| but that shouldn't be news to anyone. Just wear your N95 when
| mixing dry pigments as you always should.
| icedistilled wrote:
| It's not the LD50 for Cobalt Blue, but the LD50 for soluble
| Cobalt salts is between 150 and 500 mg/kg and Cobalt toxicity
| seems to be a thing. But the LD50(rat) for cobalt blue is >
| 10000 mg/kg according to the MSDS I'm looking at. That
| doesn't sound toxic.
|
| Wiki says this about cobalt: "it causes respiratory problems
| when inhaled. It also causes skin problems when touched;
| after nickel and chromium, cobalt is a major cause of contact
| dermatitis"
|
| So for people looking for an example of something that's
| somewhat toxic, but much less toxic as a paint. Here you go,
| Cobalt Blue. The color this new can be substituted for. yeah
| the toxicities are different, but it's the same idea.
| ehnto wrote:
| I think that's for the processed pigment though, what about
| during manufacturing?
| corndoge wrote:
| Isn't LD50 only relevant to acute exposure?[0] Just because
| you can eat 5 grams of something and survive doesn't mean
| repeated exposure to it in smaller quantities or in other
| ways won't hurt you (obviously). E.g. acute inhalation of
| asbestos has no recorded mortality. I think I'm missing
| something in your post.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose
| Daub wrote:
| Dangerous pigments is old news to painters, and artists in
| general. Check out the book Artist Beware (Michael McCann).
| Pigments I used, and still use when I can get them, are the
| Cadmiums (red, yellow), flake white (lead oxide) and Naples
| yellow. All very poisonous.
|
| A great influence on me as an artist, and a good friend, died
| prematurely almost certainly as a result of his exposure to
| dangerous materials. In his case, asbestos.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| A surprising number of dyes and pigments are very toxic. I have
| no idea if this is unusually toxic, but it wouldn't surprise me
| if it's the norm.
| scns wrote:
| There are carcinogenic ones used in red lipstick.
| dragosmocrii wrote:
| I remember Zara was once in the spotlight due to their
| clothes containing toxic dyes
| rini17 wrote:
| Isn't indium used everywhere in solder as a less toxic
| replacement for lead?
| okl wrote:
| AFAIK only in specialised low-temp solder, like the one sold
| by Chip-Quik to desolder sensitive components.
| namibj wrote:
| That's Tin-Bismuth eutectic, forming a 99 C (a hair below
| boiling water) eutectic when mixed with lead.
| throwaway5752 wrote:
| Probably not good, but consider Cadmium Red, Chromium Green,
| Lead White, and Vermillion (Mercury), among others.
| idiocrat wrote:
| Yes, just another few elements to leak into environment,
| rivers, oceans.
|
| It does not matter if the chemical compound is inert or not,
| the elements will be well incorporated into a new vector of
| nature.
| [deleted]
| ImprovedSilence wrote:
| Yeah, but they cause cancer. Things like lymphomas that
| killed Bob Ross cuz those are the pigments painters use.
| awalton wrote:
| Ross's lymphoma was thought to have been caused by
| dichloromethane exposure from his odorless paint thinner
| (and him 'beating the devil' out of his brushes
| aerosolizing it).
|
| It's now banned in paint thinners as a result of some
| pretty long lobbying efforts. It's a little sad, since
| chemicals like DCM are hard to replace, but if it saves the
| lives of our artists at the expense of them having a bit of
| a harder time cleaning their brushes, maybe we can live
| with that.
| tryptophan wrote:
| Chemical reactions (such as forming it into a pigment) greatly
| change the biological effects substances have.
|
| For example, you probably shouldn't drink OH- or H2O2, even
| though it is made of the same atoms as water.
|
| Just because the pure elemental form is toxic doesn't make
| compounds with it toxic as well.
| JohnJamesRambo wrote:
| I don't think that is a very good example. A better example
| would be is there a safe compound with lead or arsenic or
| mercury (known toxic elements) you would want to take into
| your body?
| ampdepolymerase wrote:
| Organic chemistry should probably be made mandatory as part
| of high school science education like physics. Parent looks
| like Exhibit A for anti-thiomersal hysteria.
| owenmarshall wrote:
| >> lead or arsenic or mercury
|
| > Organic chemistry
|
| Heh.
| acidbaseextract wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethylmercury
|
| "Heh" is an obnoxious response, as if an organic
| chemistry class wouldn't teach the basics of
| organometallics and some of the things that make
| compounds more or less dangerous.
| ampdepolymerase wrote:
| Correct. One reaction involving mercury would be
| Oxymercuration, a process that is usually covered in
| Organic Chemistry 1.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymercuration_reaction
| Scea91 wrote:
| It is not? I had at least 2 years of organic chemistry at
| high school (Czechia).
| GreenWatermelon wrote:
| same in Egypt.
| hobofan wrote:
| In Germany it's 1 year of the final 2 year Chemistry
| elective, where most people instead choose Biology or
| Physics (and I think if you are on a language focused
| path you might not even have to do one of them).
| dividedbyzero wrote:
| It depends on the state level, but I believe in most (if
| not all?) you need to take at least one year of anorganic
| and one year of organic chemistry
| hobofan wrote:
| Just looked it up and you are right, all of 10th grade is
| already focused on organic chemistry[0] (in Bavaria) for
| those with a STEM profile, while other profiles also have
| organic chemistry that year, but a bit less of it.
|
| [0]: http://www.isb-
| gym8-lehrplan.de/contentserv/3.1.neu/g8.de/id...
| makomk wrote:
| One of the things I learnt in actual chemistry classes
| was that organomercury compounds actually tend to be
| really toxic compared to elemental mercury.
| Unfortunately, there's been a fair amount of
| misinformation spread about this online in the name of
| fighting anti-vaxxers, often involving misleading
| analogues with stuff like chlorine and sodium.
| adrian_b wrote:
| I believe that the anti-thiomersal hysteria was quite
| justified.
|
| Even if thiomersal is more effective at killing bacteria
| than at killing humans, there are no doubts that it is
| also toxic for humans and for any other animals.
|
| While the thiomersal dose injected together with a
| vaccine is small enough so that in most cases it will not
| cause damages before being eliminated from the body, the
| risks are not negligible.
|
| To willingly inject yourself with poison, even in a
| quantity that hopefully will not hurt you, seems rather
| stupid.
|
| Better alternative bactericides must be found for vaccine
| preservation.
| p_l wrote:
| The amount of mercury intake with vaccine that was
| preserved using thiomersal is smaller than amount mercury
| taken into organism when you drink a cup of tap water in
| many countries, including tap water declared safe to
| drink.
|
| That's why it wasn't justified.
| jasonhansel wrote:
| Yes. As one example, arsenobetaine is an arsenic-containing
| compound that is naturally present in almost all fish that
| we consume. It is entirely harmless to humans in normal
| amounts, since we don't metabolize it into ordinary
| arsenic.
| chrisbennet wrote:
| Yes, tooth fillings.
|
| "Dental amalgam is a mixture of metals, consisting of
| liquid (elemental) mercury and a powdered alloy composed of
| silver, tin, and copper. Approximately half (50%) of dental
| amalgam is elemental mercury by weight. The chemical
| properties of elemental mercury allow it to react with and
| bind together the silver/copper/tin alloy particles to form
| an amalgam."
|
| https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/dental-devices/dental-
| am....
| esperent wrote:
| Amalgam fillings do offgas tiny amounts of mercury. Of
| course, this is a controversial topic and there's a lot
| of misinformation around, so do your own research.
| Personally, I came to the conclusion that the one amalgam
| filling I have is ok but too many would cause potentially
| toxic buildup over a lifetime so I'll never get another.
| OJFord wrote:
| Why does it need to be safe to 'take into your body'? I'm
| not going to drink lead paint or the turpentine used to
| clean brushes either.
| mathgeek wrote:
| Likely for the same reason we rarely use lead paint
| anymore, or why micro plastics are a concern in bath
| products. Just for a couple of examples of products you
| don't consume ending up in animal bodies.
| _Microft wrote:
| What about Barium? Water-soluble barium compounds are toxic
| while the insoluble barium sulfate is used as radiocontrast
| agent.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium_sulfate#Radiocontrast_
| a...
| voldacar wrote:
| Well sulfates in general tend to be highly insoluble in
| water, and therefore biologically inert, so I think this
| is still kind of a cherry-picked example
| avianlyric wrote:
| Isn't cherry-picking kind of the point here?
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| Mercury amalgam (silver, tin, zinc, copper, etc) fillings.
| londons_explore wrote:
| There is a strong correlation between incidence of
| mercury amalgam and alzheimer's. Obviously correlation is
| not causation, but I'd still be wary of putting mercury
| in my body...
| refurb wrote:
| No there isn't a correlation. Maybe you are thinking
| aluminum? Even then the data is weak.
|
| Mercury salts are corrosive, organomercury compounds are
| highly neurotoxic and elemental mercury is relatively
| non-toxic if ingested.
|
| The form of the element matters a lot.
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| I'd also add that elemental mercury is toxic if inhaled
| as a vapor. While I mentioned fillings as a safe use,
| there is a (very small) amount of vapor released when
| they're installed, and more gets released if they need to
| be removed. Not enough to matter in adults. If you needed
| enough fillings for it to be a concern the dental
| microbiota issues causing the decay would be a far bigger
| general health threat. Indeed, Alzheimer's is linked to
| gingivitis (gum disease) and the hypothesized link with
| amalgam fillings may be an artifact of people with worse
| gum disease having worse dental health, and thus more
| fillings.
| ryder9 wrote:
| [citation required]
| [deleted]
| conception wrote:
| Mercury? Of course. Tooth fillings.
| cromka wrote:
| Just google "mercury amalgam cancer".
| sk5t wrote:
| Just google "vaccine autism" - what's the difference?
| xevrem wrote:
| theirs is based in scientific knowledge, yours is based
| in ignorance of that knowledge
|
| "molecules are not the same as elements"
|
| now repeat it with me
|
| "molecules are not the same as elements"
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| I live in pride of my mercury-compound amalgam. You can
| choose to live in fear.
|
| "Numerous other organizations have also publicly declared
| the safety and effectiveness of amalgam. These include
| the Mayo clinic,[21] the U.S. Food and Drug
| Administration (FDA),[22] Health Canada,[23] Alzheimer's
| Association,[24] American Academy of Pediatrics,[25]
| Autism Society of America,[26] U.S. Environmental
| Protection Agency,[27] National Multiple Sclerosis
| Society,[28] New England Journal of Medicine,[29]
| International Journal of Dentistry,[30] National Council
| Against Health Fraud,[31] The National Institute of
| Dental and Craniofacial Research NIDCR,[32] American
| Cancer Society,[33] Lupus Foundation of America,[34] the
| American College of Medical Toxicology,[35] the American
| Academy of Clinical Toxicology"
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_amalgam_controvers
| y
| spoonjim wrote:
| I'm not deep in a hole "living in fear," I just got the
| resin and don't have to think about it anymore.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| The resin fillings don't last nearly as long. You'll need
| a replacement down the road. I'm going on 40 years or so
| with my mercury filling.
| OpieCunningham wrote:
| From that link:
|
| "A large retrospective cohort study found a significant
| association of mercury based fillings with the
| development of Parkinson's disease."
|
| (Reference to 2000 - 2008 study in Taiwan.)
| xapata wrote:
| How many diseases did they significance test? What's the
| causal mechanism? Was there a proportional response, or
| was the causal variable thresholded arbitrarily?
| perl4ever wrote:
| For better or worse, the dentists I have gone to in
| recent years don't use it any more. I have some old
| mercury fillings and at least one newer resin one.
|
| Your link is interesting. It seems like the arguments
| against mercury amalgam being a problem include:
|
| 1) organizations like you listed saying don't worry
|
| 2) obvious scammers making a living blaming everything on
| fillings, even nonexistent ones
|
| 3) only 5% of people with fillings having elevated
| mercury in urine, particularly gum chewers
|
| 4) "hypersensitivity or allergy" are the "most likely
| health effects" but there is not clear evidence for or
| against autoimmune disorders caused by fillings.
|
| It seems to me that it's perfectly conceivable, at the
| same time, that there is or has been a scam/cult of
| mercury fillings causing every possible problem, and at
| the same time, that they _do_ do something to a minority
| of recipients that is different from acute mercury
| toxicity that we know about. There could be a combination
| of more than normal mercury released and more than normal
| sensitivity.
|
| Something that would be interesting to research, I think,
| is the microbiome of people with and without different
| kinds of fillings. There's been some recent claim(s)
| about the bacteria that cause gingivitis being linked to
| Alzheimers.
| namibj wrote:
| Here (DE) they stopped using it for fillings where it'd
| be visible in social settings.
| heliodor wrote:
| Health-related topics is one place where google fails
| miserably.
| thereare5lights wrote:
| > A better example would be is there a safe compound with
| lead or arsenic or mercury (known toxic elements) you would
| want to take into your body?
|
| Dental amalgam
| hyperpallium2 wrote:
| Sodium and Chlorine are both pretty nasty.
| fortran77 wrote:
| There's a safe compound with sodium and chlorine that I eat
| every day.
| ReptileMan wrote:
| They are not toxic though - they are just so reactive
| that they corrode tissue.
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| Why does that matter? The point is you can combine
| elements and create compounds that are drastically
| different to the components with different properties.
|
| Obvious one is water. H - explody. O2 - burny. H2O - puts
| out fires, quenches your thirst, no longer a gas, not
| very reactive.
| namibj wrote:
| Because corrosive is way different than toxic.
| Particularly, acid/base corrosion can and will be
| neutralized by our body once sufficiently diluted. Toxic
| compounds, especially heavy metals, stay toxic even if
| diluted.
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| Again, so what?
|
| The point being made is that you can take dangerous
| elements and then create a compound that doesn't share
| the properties of the elements.
|
| So a counter argument is to show that's not true for the
| elements that make up the compound for this blue dye.
| onei wrote:
| Thimerosal is a mercury compound used as a preservative in
| vaccinations [1].
|
| 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal
| pacificmint wrote:
| Here are two articles about how this pigment was discovered:
|
| https://www.npr.org/2016/07/16/485696248/a-chemist-accidenta...
|
| https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2018-quest-for-billion-do...
| pmoriarty wrote:
| _" The pigment--which is the first new blue discovered in 200
| years--was finally approved by the EPA for use in artists'
| materials last May."_
|
| The EPA under the Trump administration.[1][2][3][4]
|
| I'd take a wait-and-see approach on this one.
|
| Not to mention that there are so many great colors that have seen
| hundreds of years of human use.. as opposed to this one, which
| has seen zero.
|
| [1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/27/climate/epa-trump-
| biden.h...
|
| [2] - https://apnews.com/article/politics-science-
| environment-e0c8...
|
| [3] - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronavirus-trump-
| administratio...
|
| [4] - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/how-the-trump-
| administ...
| Bjartr wrote:
| As easy as it is to look at Trump's impact on the EPA and
| simply assume everything the EPA did during his tenure is de-
| facto bad. In this case, it would be useful to understand what
| specific impact his changes had on the EPA's ability to
| effectively evaluate the pigment against the Toxic Substances
| Control Act testing requirements mentioned in the article.
|
| People clearly put a lot of work into this pigment, it'd be a
| shame to shun that only because they happened to apply for its
| use in consumer products while Trump was in office.
| Talanes wrote:
| Yeah, I don't ever recall seeing something that made me think
| Trump was in the pocket of "Big Pigment."
| Forge36 wrote:
| If you believe they are doing something wrong, tell them.
|
| There is an email listed regulatoryaffairs@
|
| They may not be nefarious, I wouldn't judge them on someone
| else's actions. I don't know that two are related
|
| https://www.shepherdcolor.com/about/overview/
| ThrowawayR2 wrote:
| According to the article " _YInMn Blue has been approved for US
| use in industrial coatings and plastics since September 2017_
| ", so saying that it has seen zero years of human use is not
| quite true.
| sitzkrieg wrote:
| its seen zero years of use, no kidding?
| ncmncm wrote:
| Trying to reconcile "extremely high price" with "we want to paint
| buildings with this stuff". Clue?
| 542458 wrote:
| Very expensive buildings? Relatively dilute paint? Agreed, it
| does seem like a disconnect.
| dang wrote:
| Related from 2019: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20245672
| summm wrote:
| Indium is very rare. Used for transparent conductors on displays
| etc. Is it really worth it to use it in a slightly better blue?
| In other words: does its current price really reflect all the
| future use we could get from Indium?
| adrian_b wrote:
| Indium is comparable in abundance with gold, so it is indeed
| very rare.
|
| Indium is completely irreplaceable in LED's, especially in the
| LED's used for lighting, and also in other important
| semiconductor devices, e.g. in the GaN transistors that are now
| used in the latest miniaturized power bricks.
|
| Currently the largest quantity of indium is used for the
| transparent conductors required in all displays, from
| smartphones to TV's and monitors. There are alternatives for
| this use, but all have various disadvantages, e.g. a lower
| lifetime or a lower efficiency.
|
| I agree that wasting indium, which is probably the element with
| the lowest known resources compared to the known future needs
| for it, to make something like pigments, where there are a lot
| of mostly equivalent alternatives, is a serious mistake.
| annoyingnoob wrote:
| I would say, do not underestimate the value of art. The
| article described an artist that made is own paint from the
| pigment. He painted a depiction of an ancient bird, its
| absolutely beautiful. This use was not a waste of resources
| and will in fact last much much longer than any screen made
| in 2021.
|
| Its arguable that using precious resources for products that
| last less than 20 years, in many cases less than 5 years, is
| a true waste.
| adrian_b wrote:
| I agree that using such a pigment for a small number of art
| objects would certainly be justified, like also the use of
| gold in art objects or jewelry, instead of its more
| valuable technical uses, for which there are no
| alternatives, e.g. in protecting electrical contacts from
| corrosion or in semiconductor metallization.
|
| However, if instead of using this pigment in a few valuable
| paintings, it would be used in a high number of ephemeral
| sketches done for practice, that would be a waste.
|
| Nevertheless, the high price at which the pigment has been
| launched is good, because it will probably deter casual
| use.
| mcbutterbunz wrote:
| This is an area that I know absolutely nothing about, so the
| notion that new pigments are being created is fascinating to me.
| I've never really considered pigments and the chemicals used to
| make all of these colors.
| Daub wrote:
| Check out this timeline of pigments through the ages. See how
| the industrial revolution multiplied the number of colors
| available.
|
| http://www.webexhibits.org/pigments/intro/history.html
| tdaltonc wrote:
| Consider getting the book "The Secret Lives of Colors." The
| book itself is a beautiful object and the contents are a great
| dive in to the history and chemistry of pigment and color.
|
| https://g.co/kgs/Np4PF6
| archsurface wrote:
| https://duckduckgo.com/?q=The+Secret+Lives+of+Colour&t=ffab&.
| ..
| trevortheblack wrote:
| > The store sells the paint for $179.40 for just 40 ML. By
| comparison, the other structure acrylics it offers starting in
| sizes no smaller than 75 ML are available from just $8.70.
|
| $4.485 per ML versus $0.116 per ML. That's a difference of almost
| 40x cost. I wonder how much of that is offset by how
| saturated/opaque the pigment is. Still, an incredibly expensive
| blue.
|
| > Connecticut artist Michael Rothman got his hands on some Kremer
| YInMn blue pigment in 2019 and produced his own paint, "hand
| milling the dry material in acrylic emulsion resin," he said.
|
| I wonder what the difference in cost is for the dry pigment
| andrewla wrote:
| Phthalo Blue is more recent than 200 years; it was isolated in
| the early 20th century.
| boibombeiro wrote:
| The article specifies as the first non organic pigment.
| airstrike wrote:
| While that may be true, it does not make the headline any
| less inaccurate and clickbaity
| fermienrico wrote:
| I've bought several hundred tubes of paint in last 20 years. I've
| seen artists gravitating towards more expensive paints as a sign
| of better pigmentation which is completely misplaced. Pricing of
| pigments is largely a complex equation including marketing by
| paint manufacturers to pose Cadmiums and Chromiums as "premium"
| quality paints. The truth couldn't be farther from that. Modern
| synthetic pigments are superior, safer and have far better
| lightfastness than the Cadmiums and Chromiums. Perylene red is
| amazing. Mix it with a dash of Titanium white and you can get
| very close to the opacity of Cadmiums. Mix it with Zinc white and
| you've got a far more brilliant red than anything else. But,
| Artists' I've worked with tend to gullibly gravitating towards
| the more expensive == better philosophy. I found this hilarious
| when buying paint during my early days in art world.
|
| The quality of paint is measured by several characteristics such
| as pigment load, lightfastness, opacity/transparency, tinting
| strength, etc. Not its scarcity in nature.
| throw0101a wrote:
| See:
|
| > _In economics and consumer theory, a Giffen good is a product
| that people consume more of as the price rises and vice versa_
|
| * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giffen_good
| fermienrico wrote:
| Thanks for educating me on this! It is super interesting that
| there is a formal theory behind it.
| billfruit wrote:
| Very insightful. Will be interested to know of your preferred
| 12 colour palette.
| fermienrico wrote:
| I use a Yellow Ochre Light, Pthalo Blue, Titanium White, Zinc
| White, Transparent Oxide Red (for blocking), Pthalo Green and
| Perylene Red :)
|
| Although, you can just use Richard Schmid's palette, replace
| all the toxic junk with modern pigments and you're good to
| go. The thing is to stick with the palette forever for many
| decades so that your paintings have a cohesive harmony.
| bluenose69 wrote:
| I notice that the Windsor & Newton watercolour series has
| nothing called Perylene Red, but it has a nice looking
| colour named Perylene Maroon that seems similar.
| billfruit wrote:
| Thanks. Only after you mentioned did I lookup Perylene Red,
| looks great.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-01-17 23:01 UTC)