It’s an ethical question really. From one perspective, what one sees when one looks at a such a print is only platinum. Though the palladium acts as a catalyst, it does print out and remain in the image, so there is palladium in the print; however, the palladium didn’t cause the platinum any color shift.
I’m curious how you would view this. Examples from the wine industry are helpful. Legally, the California wine industry will call any wine a specific varietal if it has 75% of that grape in it. The same goes for region as well, therefore, a Sonoma county Pinot Noir can have 25% Petit Sirah from any other county. However, should the vintner mix vintages, a 2006 vintage must have 95% that vintage in it. One last tid bit for the purists, barrels are extremely expensive and are typically rotated into a vintage at most in thirds. Using all brand new barrels would force the vintner to age her or his wine less than three months which really takes away from the “aging” of wine. The sixty gallon barrel retains four gallons from whatever was in it before. So no vintage is ever 100% except when the wine remains in stainless steel.
Practicality trumps idealism and pragmatism governs the law on wine. What are your views on platinum prints?