I am assured that several people can discern a difference between Science Friction and Plasti-Dip. So there must be a difference. If someone has both items/products and can detect a quantifiable difference between them, then it's pointless someone else attempting to argue that the items/products are identical.
And it also appears that Science Friction and Plasti-Dip have the same chemical make-up. Someone on the Genii forum has prepared several cards, some with Science Friction and some with Plasti-Dip., and has posted them to someone else who will compare them blind.
In the meantime, I bought some Plasti-Dip and tried it. And that’s why I writing this. It works. As others have said, Double Lifts and Elmsley Counts become completely natural.
Having said that, the handling of a Plasti-Dipped double card doesn’t seem to differ much from one which has been conventionally roughed. But then I haven’t had that much experience with roughing fluid.
I don’t really see the value of this for an Elmsley Count, ‘cos nearly everything that I perform that uses an Elmsley Count involves multiple Elmsley Counts. But thinking about it as I write this, it could be used in B’wave and in Twisted Sisters for Elmsley Counts.
I have two different presentations for Twilight Angels, and I can think of two different applications of Plasti-Dip for those.
Dave
PS - Much has been made of the fact that one can apply Science Friction to one area of a card, thus giving selective handling. That has been known (and used) with roughing fluid for decades.