| Author | Message | ||
  Eric Unregistered guest |
You're right Jay. I'd recommend to anybody using a hake brush to watch how Ransom uses it. He even paints people with it! It's a great antidote for "fiddling". | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 115 Registered: 10-2006 |
They are equivalent to getting a new prom dress for a 16-year-old, or getting a new tricycle for a four-year-old. Or getting a new '65 Triumph Bonneville for a British bike collector. They just do things that no other brush has done for me to this point. You gotta remember--I love glazes. They lay on color, without bending over or disturbing the underlying layer, better than any brush I've ever used. I haven't tried a full sheet painting yet. Give me a week or two and I'll come back on this one....and they are soooo cheap. They'd rate number one in the consumer reports of brushes. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
You're very very welcome! Now all you need is a Ron Ranson tape or two. <grin> They are fun to use, aren't they? Especially with the so-different construction of these, which takes away so many of the problems of 'regular' Hakes. Glad you're enjoying my recommendation. /Jay | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 109 Registered: 10-2006 |
I finally ordered the Ranson Hake Brushes, one of each. They are wonderful...kind of like a secret weapon in our arsenal. They hold a lot of water and pigment but also give it up quickly if you use a towel before putting the brush to the paper. I'm not sure why, but I like the way the pigment separates on the paper. It may be that I am using hot pressed paper right now, but I'm having a great time with these brushes. The Raphael's also came and I like them, they have a nice sharp point and lots of body, but the hake brushes were so cheap. I don't have to worry about wearing them out. They are definitely my best new toy in a long time. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I think Bill was talking about the big brushes==#12s and up. This is where you start seeing the difference in spring between brands. | ||
SZ Unregistered guest |
About brushes just like anything else, it is often about preference not better than. I have a Rosemary #7 and love it, and Rosemary herself is a very easy person to deal with--you don't like, she'll take it back. Thus far I think I've tried nearly all of the well-known brushes with the except of Kalish and Raphael, and to date the Escoda remains my favourite, with close runner up being the Rosemary and least favourite the Arches. I'll be in Washington State in a few weeks and intend to visit Dakota Brushes and see some others first hand. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Rekha--Following is a reposted quote from Bill about brand difference in Kolinsky's: "As one who has wasted a lot of money trying to find the perfect Kolinsky round, you can skip the W&N series 7. These days they are not well made and refuse to hold a point. I simply wasted money on ordering one of those unusable brushes! The best brush I have found --by far superior to the series 7, is the raphael series 8404. These are full bellied and they point. Every workshop I've been to where the artists used a Kolinsky, they always used a Raphael 8404. I prefer the #14. I would also avoid the Rosemary kolinsky's out of England. They are made with a limp hair that is more like squirrel than sable." | ||
Rekha Advanced Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 144 Registered: 8-2006 |
Before Bill's advice I bought #12 round from Luxartis. He claims his are kolinsky, but when you test it for springiness and snap, the tip curls which a genuine kolinsky will never do. Anyway, it didn't cost all that much, which should have been a giveaway, but also I was able to get my money back | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 171 Registered: 8-2006 |
I think can tell the difference between a kolinsky and a not-kolinsky. The problem I encounter is that a lot of brushes that claim to be kolinsky probably aren't. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 170 Registered: 8-2006 |
Ouch! $250 is out of my budget. I want a 1 1/2" sable, but not that much. By the way, I found the 1 1/4" for $10. There's a gentleman who comes around here once or twice a year selling factory seconds. We just call him "the brush man." He brings an enormous duffel bag full of all kinds of brushes of all shapes and sizes and uses, and dumps them out on a table. The brushes have stripes painted on them, and you pay $1 per stripe. Here and there I have found some incredibly nice brushes from him. | ||
Rekha Advanced Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 143 Registered: 8-2006 |
Unfortunately, that seller has run out of #14 and #16. Bill's advice is solid, but I still wonder whether anyone can tell the difference between one kolinsky from another if the labels were removed. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 169 Registered: 8-2006 |
By the way, on Bill's advice I ordered one of the Raphael 8404's, size 14, on eBay. It's a real jewel. I am incredibly happy with it. | ||
Rekha Advanced Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 142 Registered: 8-2006 |
Kalish does 1 1/2" but have you seen the price.....$250!!!! | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 168 Registered: 8-2006 |
I have a Princeton 1 1/4", which I also like a lot. I have a Richeson 3/4", It's a good brush, but I don't use it much because I prefer my 1" and 1 1/4" flats. The size wins out over the brand for me. I have a couple of the W/N Cotman flats, but they're not my favorites. I have a hard time creating a crisp edge with them. If I could find a 1 1/2" sable, I would get it. | ||
Rekha Advanced Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 140 Registered: 8-2006 |
Have you tried any flats other than Magic Dragon? | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 167 Registered: 8-2006 |
I think of the shorter flats as allowing more control. The longer flats, however, will hold more water. I tend to like longer hairs --- but then I like wild brushwork, so you might want to take that into consideration. By the way, I have one of the CJAS Magic Dragon 1" flats, and I like it very much. | ||
Rekha Advanced Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 138 Registered: 8-2006 |
I intend to buy kolinsky flats, 1", but find that there are two types. One has shorter hair than the other. What difference does that make, if any? | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Thanks Eugene--I think it all depends, as you say, on how you paint. I paint big and the 1 1/2" one stroke flat white sable (nylon) by Robert Simmons is my mainstay. W/N makes one with a yellow handle, series 680 one stroke, that is identical. These seem like the best big synthetic flats I've used. | ||
Eugene Advanced Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 101 Registered: 8-2006 |
Krisha, RE: Majestic versus Kolinsky I think it all depends on the size and style of your paintings. I no longer paint big, usually only quarter sheet, so I don’t need brushes that hold a lot of water. Majestics rounds point well and the flats have a sharp chisel edge, making it easy to cut around things. If I want a big juicy wash I use my Tsunami squirrel flats,which are a little floppy but hold tons of water. When I was in art school, 55 years ago, we used only kolinsky rounds. Synthetics weren’t available. Hardly anyone used flats for watercolor. And, heaven forbid, we all used alizarin crimson and paynes gray, and somehow survived! Synthetics are not for everyone. You must decide what’s best for you. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 98 Registered: 8-2006 |
Oh, that site. Yes, I am aware of that. I had promised to paint the watercolour of the cottonwood tree she has shown for comments, but haven't really got around to it yet | ||
Raliegh Member Username: Raliegh Post Number: 47 Registered: 8-2006 |
Rekha, on Jan's site there is Hart News & demos, go there and click on archives click an archive and there is always a demo. Good stuff. | ||
Maidensmith New member Username: Maidensmith Post Number: 8 Registered: 8-2006 |
I absolutely agree that artist quality paper is far better than any student paper that I have tried. Even my granddaughters see the difference in painting on Nanny's good stuff! IMHO, a quality brush, whether Kolinsky or synthetic- makes a huge difference, too. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 96 Registered: 8-2006 |
Mmm, Raliegh thanks. I couldn't find any online classes that Jan holds. I did buy a few units from Virtual Art Academy and was reasonably happy with them. | ||
Raliegh Member Username: Raliegh Post Number: 46 Registered: 8-2006 |
Rekha, I think there is a good supply of tutorialage on line. Jan Hart w/c has a great site and she was very influence by Georgia O'. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Marie, I agree that most student grade paper is the least useful of the student grade products. I think maybe everyone would agree with that. The machine texture is very distracting. I don’t think the problem of paint dilution (tendency for all the washes to look like weak tea), is a problem from using student grade paint. It’s more an issue of, or a reflection of, a timid and mild personality. I heard a story about one teacher who made a student (adult) scream out loud many times at the top of her lungs in an attempt to get her to loosen up and be less timid with her painting. I don’t know if it worked or not. A.N. Good insight! Bill, I agree with you that about half a dozen student paints across the various brands are great. And, I also agree that most of the academy line isn't as good as the artists grade line, but even student grade cadmium red and cobalt blue (while not real cadmium or real cobalt) can still be used by a beginning student (adult or otherwise) to learn proper color theory. Also, a later transition to artist grade isn’t really very difficult. I’d like to make one last comment on the topic; the argument for developing the mind by using artist quality materials from the beginning is, in my opinion, well intentioned, but mistaken (I’m not saying a person with the money shouldn’t buy the best from the start). But, I do want to point out that any true discussion of the proper way to develop the mind in relation to a specific task (watercolor painting in this case) requires a hierarchy of cognitive skills. I don’t believe sensitivity in the use of artist grade (highest quality) materials would be at the front end of any such hierarchy of cognitive skills. Good night guys! | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Eugene--I would be interested if you could verbalize what it is about the Majestic brushes you prefer over kolinsky. BTW I love your paintings. Your colors are much more vibrant than Whitney's, who seems to use ivory black in every mix--ugggh. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 121 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, sorry I have been teaching all day and have been away from the computer. You asked how students handle artist grade materials as opposed to student grade materials. Frankly, I can't tell whether they are using student grade paints and brushes unless I look at the brush or tube of paint. I can, however, tell immediately when they use student grade paper. Most of my students are in high income brackets, and so finances don't tend to be an issue. I recommend artist grade paints, but I don't fuss at the them if they use student grade paints. Two issues with paint do seem to make a difference though: 1) A lot of students want to squeeze out miserly little amounts of paint on the palette. I would rather see them use plenty of student grade paint than a tiny dab of artist grade paint. 2) A lot of students have trouble with paint dilution -- there's a really tendency for all the washes to look like weak tea. Getting the right paint consistency takes more practice than I would have imagined before I began teaching. (Charles Reid is right when he hammers on folks about paint dilution.) I think that students, who are already having trouble mixing enough paint with the water, would be well served to get paint with high concentrations of pigment and minimal filler. I haven't done enough testing of student vs. artist grade paints to make a call on how much filler is in the student grade paints. | ||
Eugene Intermediate Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 100 Registered: 8-2006 |
WHAT A DISCUSSION! all these thoughts in just one day. I love this group. Well, here are my two cents worth. I am not poor and can afford any materials I want to buy. 1. I use Van Gogh paints because I like them. I hardly ever use cad. red and seldom use cobalt or cerulean, which seem to be the biggest offenders. I never read Wilcox, Handprint or the like. I’ve conducted my own permanency tests and am satisfied with the results. 2. I use Royal Langnickel Majestic synthetic brushes and Tsunami squirrel flats. I own several good kolinskys but don;t like them. 3. I use only 140# Waterford or Arches CP or Rough, stretched. I like these much better than 300# I never use student paper. And Krisha, if you think Ed Whitney’s work is ugly, I hope you never see mine.! | ||
Bi;; Unregistered guest |
I don't think anyone is saying student grade paints are terrible and can't be used to make great art. That's missing the point, in my opinion. I think the academy ultramarine and lemon yellow are first rate. There are about half a dozen student paints across the various brands that are great. These are some of them. But the entire academy line isn't anywhere near as good. Also, the academy ultramarine has very large particle that granulate heavily. Someone just learning might want a more user friendly ultramarine like the artist grade with finer particles and more controllable granulation. | ||
Maidensmith New member Username: Maidensmith Post Number: 7 Registered: 8-2006 |
I own both artist quailty Grumbacher ultramarine and Academy ultramarine and I much prefer the Academy - the same holds true for the lemon yellow. On the Handprint site he does not discuss student paints, but he has a low opinion of DaVinci paints which manufactures American Journey and Wilcox paints. I don't share his opinion on DaVinci paints. I say experiment with all knids and types and use what works for you and what you are trying to paint. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 95 Registered: 8-2006 |
Well, A.N., it has taken several months of referencing and cross-referencing but I am happy to report that I feel comfortable with a lot of what I read now. And you did suggest Georgia O'Keefe to me some time ago; you guessed right I love her style but I don't necessarily want to painting botanical illustrations only | ||
A.N. Unregistered guest |
Rekha--I would suggest getting books by artists whose work appeals to you and learn how they achieve that look. Over the years you'll develop a style based on these artists as influences but still your own. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Well "worthless" is overstatement--as a matter of fact he does point out that some student grades are as good as the artist grade, as Eric said--mainly because they use the same pigment (but, he doesn't mention) in lower concentration. However, you really can;t learn much about the paints from that guide. Handprint is more detailed and accurate but doesn't even go into student grade paint (the assumption being why bother I suppose). | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 94 Registered: 8-2006 |
It might sound absurd but a lot of your progress depends on the art books you read, in the absence of being able to afford art classes. I was trying to learn from Alwyn Crayshaw's book because I had no idea which art books were good to read and learn from | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Yes ..student grade colors are good in a few specific pigments, but what about cadmium red, cobalt blue etc. ? Not even the correct pigments are used in student grade. Also, have you ever compared Grumbacher academy ultramarine to the Grumbacher artist grade ultramarine? There is a world of quality improvement- color is richer, a different hue, and granulation is much finer in the artist grade--facts that Wilcox blithely ignores. I would go so far as to say the Wilcox guide is misguided and almost worthless. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 93 Registered: 8-2006 |
I started painting on Langton paper because the local art shop said it was the best and I didn't know any different and I didn't know the existence of this forum nor had I read any books. I didn't like the results I was getting; they were pasty and the paper cockled a lot. Then I read books and tested the Arches 600gsm paper; the results were a revelation about quality and performance. The same applied to the brushes: I have the sapphire brushes for the same reason as for the paper and then I read more about brushes on this forum and got the Kolinsky. The difference to my beginner's mind is mindblowing; the brush glides on the paper, unlike the part-sable part synthetic brush. I am no longer biased in my judgment about the paper/brushes I need, but I have spent nearly 12 months of experimentation which could have been better spent on the actual painting techniques | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
I noticed in the Wilcox Guide to Watercolor paints that there are quite a few Grumbacher Academy and Cotman colors, both considered student grade, that are rated higher than a lot of the professional grade colors. Just an observation. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Hake brushes.... I got the ProArte Ranson hake set in from Cheap Joe's. They're really nice, best I've ever tried. My last word on the, ummmm... subject. /Jay | ||
A.N. Unregistered guest |
My take is that George and Kisha are talking about 2 different people. George is making the case that if people find themselves as students or with limited finances they should feel confident that they can still learn and produce art with student grade materials. I agree with George that this needs to be said. Kisha, on the other hand, is speaking ideally--ideally one should use the best materials to make the learning go easier. She is also speaking not to students but to adults with the means to buy good materials who still select student grade materials thinking that , as George says, they can still produce passable art. In that case I agree with her assessment that such behavior is a false economy. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
I see Kisha's point. IT's not about money. It's not about snobbery. It's about learning. It's about the human brain. Even though a beginner can't tell the difference the brain is learning the nuances of paint and paper. Pure and simple. The brain is learning how a brush responds. WHY hamstring my development if I don't to??? Try painting on cheap stdent grade watercolor paper--painting on cotman paper! The result may be pleasant but it's nothing like 100% rag sized w/c paper. Nothing at all. Why learn the way this paper behaves if when you get better you have to relearn it on good paper. Why learn to mix cad. red hue with cerulean hue and get a bright purple only to graduate to real Cad red and cerulean and get a cloud gray? Why get a cheap generic brush that won't hold water well or respond only later to use a brush that does. WHY DO ANYTHING AT ALL TO HAMSTRING YOUR DEVELOPMENT? I am talking to the typical person who may be trying to learn this art and reading this board!If you have the time and desire to learn something why not adequately equip yourself? Why not help yourself learn correctly? Why do anything half assed! If you simply can't afford it, I am not talking to you. I am talking about quality not trying to invent reasons to hijack the issue into talk about finances. What is your aim as an artist --to improve as efficiently as possibly or throw up unnecessary barriers to your learning? I say this to those who are thinking about saving money by going cheap on art materials. Instead--get fewer items. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 92 Registered: 8-2006 |
That was a long time ago and a lot changed. I no longer belong to that family. But this forum isn't about that. What I mentioned was an aside. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Rekha, ha! I love the story! I bet you have great fun with your brother-in-law (over that) on every visit home. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Whitewatercolor, in a controlled experiment you would have to teach another class of similar student make up, but with a red, blue and yellow, good student quality paints and some small student quality brushes before you can determine if the beautiful work the students create is the product of the materials or the teacher. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 91 Registered: 8-2006 |
Speaking of ignorance, I have a personal story to relate but it may not have the impact it did then. When I was returning to India after my doctoral in Australia, I took a bottle of Suntan lotion for my brother-in-law because his skin was light and sensitive. The trouble was that he took it to be a contraceptive lotion, as suntan in hindi means progeny/child! | ||
Whitewatercolor Intermediate Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 60 Registered: 10-2006 |
Wine is something you enjoy once and it is soon forgotten. A painting is something that lasts your entire life, or the life of the person who buys it. I recently taught a beginning watercolor class as part of a school project, but the students were half students and half adults. I brought a red, blue and yellow, professional quality paints and some small sable brushes I had. I was absolutely amazed at the beautiful work the students created. One adult even sold one of her paintings to another adult. I got to chose several to be matted and hung in a school display. It was really hard because with brilliant pigments and mud free painting, you get lots of good work. My job, when instructing, is to make the best use of both their time and mine. I want to make their path to creating beautiful work as short as possible. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Marie, sorry, I didn’t mean to put you on the spot. I just realized my question will force you to take sides. Please ignore my question if you wish. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Speaking of wine I have a funny story you may enjoy. I was in the wine section of a liquor store lately and a young man was talking loudly on his cell phone (as they all seen to do) to his wife about the bottle of wine she had asked him to pick up. He said; “I think I found the bottle of wine you want but the wine is green not red”. This went on for some time, he trying to convince her that the wine was green not red. Her apparently telling him he had the wrong wine. I finally want over and told him it was the bottle that was green, not the wine. He told his wife this and then said to me; “my wife told me to ask you if you would recommend a good bottle of wine since you seem to know something about it”. I found a good but inexpensive wine for the young man. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, I just now read your last message. I like the nice clear examples. Let me see if I can use your examples to make my own point clearer. First, let me say I agree that if money is not a concern then go for the $30 bottle of wine instead of the $15 bottle of wine. My point is; if the student has no taste the wine from both bottles will taste the same. So, why throw away the extra $15? You are correct that some student grade paints are often low in pigment concentration and that cheap student grade paper behaves nothing like quality w/c paper. But, as I asked in my last post, can the student tell the difference, or more importantly can they make use of the difference. You ask; “why learn to mix cad red hue on paper that blotches only to "progress" into artist grade and have to learn the properties of cad. red and fine paper all over again”. Why not tell the brain from the first how it all works?” My answer would be; beginning students typically aren’t struggling with issues like how cad red granulates on paper, but rather they are struggling with how cad red mixes with ultramarine blue to make a wide range of red to blue violets, and seeing these colors in the landscape, and matching the two worlds of seen object and pigment on paper. When they get a good feel for the really hard stuff then they are ready to move onto the subtle stuff of adding a finely granulated texture to the color. For some students this process takes years. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, I’m really sorry, I didn’t make my motives as clear as I should have in my last post. I wasn’t aiming my comments about cost at you, but rather I was using our discussion to make a point aimed at the many watercolor teachers who tell their students to buy the best materials without giving them wiggle room on the cost. On the issue of learning, I agree 100% that students shouldn’t willingly choose extra impediments. But, you haven’t explained why you believe student grade materials are an impediment to most students. You just seem to be working with the assumption that most students can tell the difference. But, you offer no evidence to support that assumption. Whitewatercolor, I agree with you in principle but not in words. I don’t think you can say there is simply no comparison between student grade and professional grade in all cases (maybe you aren’t meaning to imply that). Anyway, the larger point is that most beginning students can’t see the difference between the best student grade materials and the professional grade materials. Your point was that you saw the difference, but you can’t really extrapolate that to suggest all beginning watercolor students can see a difference too. I think Marie had said she has taught watercolor classes. Marie are the majority of students aware of; the subtle differences in color intensity, the water holding power of the brush, or the relative amount of paper sizing, that mark the differences between student grade and professional grade? My guess is that your students don’t see these differences because they are struggling with the much more monumental distinctions of value range and color mixing which have little to do with the quality of materials used. | ||
Whitewatercolor Intermediate Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 59 Registered: 10-2006 |
Thanks Kisha--my point exactly. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I understand you--please under me also-- Why wouldn't a person who wants to devote lots of time and energy to getting good at something start off with the proper materials. Finances are always a caveat but that's another issue and not what i am trying to focus on. I suppose since pianos are so expensive we should recommend accordians to budding pianists. I am saying that if money is not a concern then better brushes, better paper , and better paint will help one achieve one's artistic goals. It's not a question of blind marketing response. Student grade paints substitute cadmium red hue for cad re, for instance. Same w/ Cobalt and Cerulean (white plus pthalo blue). Student grade paints are often notoriously low in pigment concentration. These are indisputable facts. Cheap student grade paper behaves nothing like quality w/c paper. Why learn to mix cad red hue (usually azo red)on paper that blotches only to "progress" into artist grade and have to learn the properties of cad. red and fine paper all over again. Why not tell the brain from the first how it all works? | ||
Whitewatercolor Intermediate Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 58 Registered: 10-2006 |
The instructor of my first watercolor class told me that student grade materials were just as good as professional quality. I struggled with her earth tones and the colors she suggested for a couple of years, buying more student grade pigments (all useless in my opinion). After 2-3 years of painting she took a class from Zoltan Szabo. Her paintings came so alive, it was like they were painted by a different artist. The difference--he told her to get rid of the student paints. She always used D'Arches paper the only thing she changed was the paint. There is simply no comparison. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
I can't help but wonder - extend the theory, as I often do. Ask yourself - if "Super Grade" artist materials were there, would that be what you'd rush out to buy? The argument is almost self-settling -- student grade materials are there (market exists) for a reason: affordability. Cut & dried, pure & simple. In that light, and on another hand, we have one 'Pro' here who has recommended several student grade paints that are as (or near as) good, for which I am appreciative, and have bought to try. And which if satisfactory, I shall place into regular use. And be more appreciative. $42K median? Try livin' on Social Security! Sure, 'pro' stuff might be better.....but we all can't always afford the better things. "Cheaper turpentine!" ~Picasso. Right on, bro! <g> /Jay | ||
Kisa Unregistered guest |
Those learning ...should NOT willingly choose extra impediments. Sorry-left out key word | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
The ledendary Edgar Whitney was a good teacher but his paintings (in his book) are strikingly ugly, especially the quality of the colors--muddy and jaundiced simultaneously--IMHO-- If you want to extend your comment to its logical conclusion that since some known artists use student grade it should be recommended to students, I want to point out that good artists can use almost anything successfully. Those learning (who can afford it--George--and those not in the equatorial jungles who have no access) should willingly choose extra impediments. Finally student grade paints are not really where the problem lies as much as in stident grade brushes and papers. Van Gogh, for instance is pretty good (though no cadmiums or cobalts). | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
The legendary Edgar Whitney supposedly used all student grade watercolors. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
George i full agree with you that the young and the poor and the third world artists can hardly afford student grade. I am not being a middle class snob, rather, I am tailoring my words to my audience. I assume that most who read here are of the non third world, more middle class group. I qualified my words early on by saying something like--if monetary concerns are not an issue--then getting good materials is recommended. I am not at all saying those who are poor are out of luck. I am saying those will to spend a lot of time and energy on watercolor are being penny rich and dollar foolish if they can afford good stuff and don't get it out of misplaced frugality. Better to forgo the restaurant and get the supplies. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, I think this is an interesting discussion too. I’d like to continue the discussion with your point “C”. I agree with you that IF a student has the monetary resources it is probably best to begin with the materials that Bill and Whitewatercolor have recommended. However, many beginning watercolor artists don’t have the monetary resources. Your point that the cost of a couple of family restaurant meals is enough to adequately outfit a watercolorist with quality gear shows that you are a middle class watercolorist. When I was young I went for a long period of many years without eating in a family restaurant because I couldn’t afford it. The vast majority of people in the world are in a lower economic bracket than I was at that time in by life. Even in America, per capita income is only $42,000 in today’s economy. I mention this because many watercolor teachers tell their students to buy the best materials without understanding the financial hardship such a demand puts on limited family income. My bigger concern is that you believe adult students might learn more efficiently with artist grade materials. I know of no research that has proven such an assertion. Granted I’ve not done a literary search on the topic, but it seems to me that the topic most certainly has been studied many times over by graduate art students. If the research findings had proven students learn more efficiently with artist grade materials I assure you we would have heard of it. So, why do most students NOT learn more efficiently with artist grade materials? I think your violin analogy answers the question. A tone-deaf student is not going to know if she is playing a good violin or playing a bad violin. Likewise, a visually inexperienced watercolor student is not going to know if she is using student quality paint or using professional quality paint. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 120 Registered: 8-2006 |
Artists and art supply catalogues are like an alcholic and alcohol-- How true! I started in watercolor by putting monochrome washes on drawings. Then, I started adding colors ... and more colors ... and more colors. I must have collected every color in the local art store. It's a compulsion, for sure. Most of the time, though, my paintings are an earth yellow (raw sienna or yellow ochre), burnt sienna, and ultramarine blue with a couple of other paints added in as necessary. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
I'll go one step further and say that in my opinion the best way to steer adult newbies is to recommend they use no more that three quality brushes (big round, big flat, and one small --mostly for signatures), a limited palette of artist grade paints(such as warm and cool primaries plus siennas), and good paper such as arches. They should become as confortable using these materials as they are using their own eyeballs . They should be lied to and told these are the only materials available and should never be allowed inside an art supply store or to see an art supply catalogue. Artists and art supply catalogues are like an alcholic and alcohol-- | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Also, Terry has a great point--if one has the monetary resources, is isn't it best to learn violin on a quality instrument rather than a plywood cheapy? The tone of the good violin would provide feedback and reinforcement that the plywood would be incapable of. The responsiveness and the relative easy of playing of the quality instrument would make learning easier and more fun. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I almost think that it is easier for an expert to do a good job with crappy materials than a student. It is conversely easier for a student to a good job with quality materials than with crappy materials. The ease of success facilitated by quality materials in the early stages would motivate one to forge ahead. Mostly though, one should get a good "feedback loop" going between the materials and the mind. I think this is an interesting discussion. Just for the record I want to clarify my thoughts (for me if for no one else): a. I am not saying good materials can magically turn someone into a good artist. b. I am not saying that student grade materials are worthless and that one cannot create good art with them. c. I am saying that if an adult is learning watercolor and has the monetary resources most adults probably have, there is no compelling reason to go through the "student material phase" since he/she might learn more efficiently with artist grade materials. I see no logical reason to prefer student grade materials because one is a student. If I had begun with quality paper for instance, i would have realized that the first blotchy failures I painted were due to crappy paper and not my lack of expertise. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Let me tell y'all how I got into watercolors. I took a calligraphy course in a night-class at our local Community College many years ago. For our 'final exam', we had to complete and submit a project for grade. One example shown by the instructor, was to create a card, like a greeting card etc., paint something on the front and around the borders inside, and inscribe it with calligraphy. Our instructor was the art teacher from one of the area high schools. She brought in several of the cheap little 'pan ovals' kits you can buy from the dime store for about a buck. For an example, using one of those cheapo kits, she recreated a card her high school class had made up to send to friends & family as invitations for their school art show. It was a lighthouse scene, with a pathway going up to it, lined with little flowers etc, ....and was nothing short of amazing! I was really impressed. I had soon before, been on a fly-fishing campout on Mt. Mitchell, camping on the banks of the South Toe River. For my project, I painted one of my favorite mind-scenes, standing in the South Toe looking upstream across a trio of small waterfalls. People kept coming by & saying "You've obviously done this before." Nope - it was a first for me, actually. I wasn't overly impressed with what I'd done, but people's reactions sure left an impression on me! At first opportunity, I signed up for a watercolor class. (And the downward spiral began! *LOL*) Just kidding....but the point is, this art instructor's creation, from such a cheapo setup, showed me what a true artist can do - so much so it's what inspired me and got me started. So, I guess that amply states my position in this discussion. The cream can rise to the top, even if the milk's sour. ~8) /Jay | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, please forgive me for the misunderstanding. Perhaps I should add that my real interest in this subject was accuracy, in case any beginning watercolor artists stumble onto these pages. As you say, not all student grade materials are crappy. Some student grade materials can provide good service for beginning students. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
George --You misunderstood me--I am not saying you can't learn from student grade materials. If you have a pile of quality materials and a pile of crapy student grade materials that are of less quality (not all SG are),nothing is to be gained by choosing pile A over pile B. Meaning that anything that can be learned with crappy materials can be learned easier and better with good materials. | ||
Whitewatercolor Intermediate Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 57 Registered: 10-2006 |
Without getting into it too much, when I'm asked for advice, I advise three tubes of professional grade paint--red, yellow and blue and the best kolinski sable brush you can afford, on professional quality paper. That is about as cheap as I would advise. | ||
Raliegh Member Username: Raliegh Post Number: 45 Registered: 8-2006 |
I agree with Bill's post. "Success happens when opportunity and preparedness meet!" Terry do you have any work of yours in CJ catalog? (yet)? | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 119 Registered: 8-2006 |
Oh, and George, I agree 100% that the best materials in the world won't necessarily make you a better artist. There's no magic brush or tube of paint that will instantly turn one into good artist. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 118 Registered: 8-2006 |
I moved to fairly decent supplies---especially paper---early on for two reasons: 1) My drawing teacher, who is an absolutely fabulous draftsman, got in the habit of doing pencil drawings on newsprint because it was cheap. Then, he couldn't break the habit because nothing else felt right. Watching these spectacular drawings turn from white to yellow to brown convinced me not to develop bad habits that I would need to break later on. 2) Relatively speaking, watercolor supplies aren't that expensive. If you figure a sheet of #140 paper costs around $3.00, and it takes you two hours to do a 1/2 sheet painting. That's 75 cents an hour. Even if you factor in the cost of paint and brushes, you're still talking about a lot less money than going to a movie. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, OK! Let’s assume you have student quality brushes, paint, and paper. It’s not accurate to say; “nothing is to be gained”. Something can be gained – color theory, proper ways of handling the brush, water control, creating proper values, and so on. When the student is ready to “see” and understand the advantages of professional materials then it’s time to move on. And, yes I am talking about adults here. Some adults have child like minds when it comes to the kind of visual skills needed to do a watercolor painting. My guess (just a guess) is that you may be addressing the issue from you own personal experiences. I think, perhaps, you were advanced enough (visually) when you began your exploration of watercolor to appreciate the advantages of professional materials. Not all adult students are, as you were. The additional expense is not only unnecessary, but also a financial burden for these highly unskilled beginners. | ||
Terry Member Username: Terry Post Number: 46 Registered: 8-2006 |
My opinion on student grade vs. artists' grade is mixed. I know for a fact in music, many people who could have been great guitarists (for example) if they had been gifted with a great intrument to begin with, turned out less so because the quality was not there from the beginning. However, many do go on and invest in a better instrument later on... I have had 4 or 5 different violins. I get to a certain point where what I hear can't be done on the one I have....I begin to look around and generally trade up to the instrument that can produce those sounds. With art supplies....I do a lot of colored pencil and marker art...only the best will do. I need Faber and Copic and the best marker paper or hot press WC paper I can get my hands on...and I can get my hands on some good stuff. But that doesn't discount the fact that some would not advance in art or music using the best of all possible supplies. Or that some will get good and move on to better stuff even if they have started with just some sketch paper and a 2b pencil. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Assume you have student quality (ie cheap and poor) student brushes, paint, and paper--nothing is to be gained but learning on them except being totally out of touch with what can be done. If money is an issue--that's another story. But if someone is going to devote time and energy to learning an art, they need their neurons processing consistently --they don;t nee dto relearn what quality paper, brushes and paint will do when they have graduated. I am talking about adults here--adults who spend on a couple of family restaurant meals enough to adequately outfit a watercolorist with quality gear. It can be done cheaply--but why? Unless money is the issue lide if too short (I recently read that here and agree). | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, that’s a very popular opinion, but one I disagree with. I think it all depends on who the beginner is. Some beginners have so little skill they are entirely unable to tell what the difference is between student grade and artists grade materials. Why put them to the added cost if nothing is to be gained by it? Think about this; 1. A great artist can create a great painting with a handful of dirt off the ground with a little water for paint and a few hairs from his own head tied to a stick for a brush. 2. A really bad artist will create crap even if given the best paint and a $300 brush. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
This all makes a good case for a) not advising beginners to start with student quality materials but) steering them to the highest quality materials from the beginning so they can begin to integrate the materials with their learning and so they won't be constantly wanting to upgrade and lose focus. I've never understood anyone steering people to shoddy equipment in the beginning. The first steps are often the most important. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Whitewatercolor, that’s a good question! I guess all I can offer in response is my own experience. When I first switched to watercolor I bought about 20 different colors. Whenever I wanted to experiment with new colors I always used up the existing experimental colors before I bought any new colors to experiment with. My attitude is; if I haven’t used the entire tube I’ve not really given it a fair chance to win me over. The same is true for brushes. I started with two or three of each kind, about a dozen in total. Whenever I wanted to experiment with new brushes I always used up the existing experimental brushes before I bought any new brushes to experiment with (a good brush only lasts about two years with heavy use). I did the same thing with paper. I do it this way in large part because I don’t have the budget to buy large quantities of materials just to experiment with and then toss. I’m not saying I think people who have money to burn on large quantities of materials are wrong. What I’m saying is; I think there are some artists who are motivated more by the buying urge than the experimental urge. You may not be one of these people, but I assume you know some who are. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
I think the problem isn't ownership but trying to use them all at once. There is a time when one should settle on his/her short list of supplies--sooner better than later. That is because one can experiment and try out all of the products forever. What if that time were put into mastering a limited palette and selection of brushes instead of product sampling. I think over concern with product sampling to find "the best" is part of the "other than making art" hobby. It makes sense when stated--try them all so you can know which is best--but in practice, life is too short and artists' skills aren't developed that way. | ||
Whitewatercolor Intermediate Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 55 Registered: 10-2006 |
A.N. I have a number 10 Isabey mop. It is really great for getting lots of water and pigment on large paintings. George. I'm sure I have about 100 brushes and 70 tubes of paint also. I don't think you can paint for years and not end up with lots of rejects. I once met an older lady who wanted to paint and didn't have supplies. I outfitted her with my trial materials from years gone by. The only way you can know what a material is like is to try it. I do--and someone will always come along who uses that color or needs some brushes. I end up using five to six colors at a time and a couple of brushes, but how do you know which ones you like the best if you haven't tried them yourself? | ||
George Unregistered guest |
A.N. I agree that collecting brushes and paints is, for some people, its own separate hobby. I know a watercolor artist that owns over a hundred different brushes and as many as 70 different tubes of paint. I think it’s like the music junkie that wants every CD on the rack. Owning all those supplies doesn’t make a person a better artist. It’s about something else – more like the guy that wants to own a can of every beer made in the world. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I just looked over Joe's workshops for 2007 on this website. Each instructor has a supply list. You can note all sorts of brush preferences but most seem to want a big flat and a big round, primarily--a few specify a few small brushes as well but many don't. Interesting. | ||
A,N. Unregistered guest |
Whitewatercolor--If you want a really big round try a #8 Isabey squirrel mop. | ||
A.N. Unregistered guest |
How many times have I gone to workshops and seen the participants with 50 colors in two palettes and many fistfuls of brushes. I am not saying great art can't be done this way, but (other than sargent and possibly a few others), it has been my experience that the professional artists presenting workshops, for instance, use only a few brushes --with limited palettes. To a person they will say that such a choice (or actually lack thereof) gives unity and stops the fussiness associated with unlimited choices. I often wonder why the workshop partticipants can't get that message. Perhaps collecting all the pretty brushes and paints is it's own separate hobby aside from painting. It all is in what you are after--I am after bold statements and familiarity with my materials that can only come with limiting the choices. | ||
Whitewatercolor Intermediate Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 54 Registered: 10-2006 |
The 10 inch Kolinski sable round is small for me. I have a market for 8x10 framed originals, so I go back and forth between painting very small and full sheet paintings. I use the 10 inch round for the small paintings (as my smallest brush for finish) and I can't quite seem to get a large enough brush of high quality for the large paintings. If you use to small of a brush the tendency is to dabble at the painting. It works best for me if I can get that pigment on in approximate shapes and then work out the form. The more water and pigment I can move around the better. Getting ozzles and too much water on the brush is something that goes away with experience. I use a soft, texture free cotton towel (like a baby diaper) and touch the end of the brush on it to test the moisture before I put the paint on (and sometimes after), if I think it may be too wet. I've seen people use rolls of toilet paper, paper towels, and wet sponges for this. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 117 Registered: 8-2006 |
Oh, and one more piece of advice on brushes. Bigger is better; when in doubt, go one size larger than you think you need. Small brushes tend to make a painting tired and overworked and should be used very judiciously. That is true regardless of whether you like naturals or synthetics. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 116 Registered: 8-2006 |
The type and quantity of brushes you use is an entirely personal decision. Do what works for you. My personal preference is similar to Bill's. For the most part I use a #10 or #12 kolinsky round, a 1 1/4" kolinsky flat, a #7 Isabey kolinsky (just for eyes and lips on figurative pieces), and another #10 kolinsky (with a white handle, so I can remember which is which) just for softening edges and adding clear water to a passage. I do about 90% of a painting with the big kolinsky round and the flat. BTW, John Singer Sargent believed that one should always work with a fist full of brushes and a minimal palette. So ... there is an argument for using lots of brushes. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Only you can decide that. I think it depends upon you and your artistic goals. The large Kolinsky round brush I have found will do much more than any other single brush. Many pros do all of their painting with one. The only other brush one would need would be a large flat to cover really big washes. A kolinsky is in a sense cheap because it does the work of several brushes. Since you have a Raphael 8404 in a large size, you have the premier artists tool available. The rest is a matter of using it and becoming familiar with it. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 90 Registered: 8-2006 |
Back to square one, then! Which brush to use...... | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Actually Rekha, the opposite is true FOR ME. I have settled on a couple of brushes and uise them for whatever job comes along, rather than have 30 brushes, each designed to be used for a particular job like a dentist or mechanic. And that is my point--the one consistent thing i have discovered among all the great artists i have been exposed to is NOT wehat brush material they use or what paints they use, but the fact that they severely limit their brushes and choices to a relative few and then full exploit their potential. This I feel is the only way to make painting intuitive. If you are constantly switching brushes or, worse, trying to decide what brush to use or what yellow to use for this passage, you run the risk of shifting the act of painting away from the creative part of the brain to the mechanical part of the brain. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 89 Registered: 8-2006 |
I am getting the distinct impression, Bill, that like the dentist, mechanic, clinician, or any other profession you use the brush and paper for the job | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Since we can find experts who swear by Kolinsky rounds, experts who can only paint with squirrel wash, and experts who promote synthetics, and experts who paint with blends-=-it is clear--at least to me-- that each of these types of brushes, if they are quality brushes, can be used. I think the trick I to find a type you like and that works with you and not against you to achieve your particular goals and they stay with it. What I don't understand is how an artist can use 25 different brushes of all types. That seems to me confusing. The same thing can be said for artists who have scores of pigments on their palettes--confusing. I think a few brushes of whatever type if handled expertly would be best. And that expertise comes from years of working with just those brushes until they are extensions not only of the hand but of the imagination and heart. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
I once took a workshop in which the artist recommended White sable brushes--a #14 and a 1 1/2" flat. I bought them and when i arrived he said he recommended them because they were cheaper but serviceable. He himself used Kolinsky sables. I was miffed because I already had Kolinsky's and had just spent another 50 bucks unnecessarily, so, almost out of spite, I used the Robert Simmons "white sables" during the workshop. They were very different in that they didn't put out a flood of liquid, just enough--though they ran out after a bit. They also were very responsive because of springiness. Used on their side, they made nice textural statements. I've been with them ever since. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Kisha: a cursory search led me to find that Barbara Nechis and Brenda Kuderas (portraits) also use Robert Simmons White Sable. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
suzytoronto.com Scroll down and check out the photo of one of the people who post here--she's clutching a Robert Simmons white sable (and what looks like a real sable flat along with it--eclectic). | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Zoltan Szabo used synthetics. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 110 Registered: 8-2006 |
I know that Robert Wade and Frank Webb prefer synthetics, and they do terrific work. I keep trying synthetics, but for the most part I have never been able to get accustomed to them. I do like them for drybrush work. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Thanks George-- I agree--it's a matter of what works. I have plenty of kolinskys and squirrels so it's not a question of lack of good tools, its simply what allows me to create the sorts of paintings I wish to create. I am curious if anyone else out there actively prefers synthetics. I concede that synthetics hold less water than sables, and thus you have to go to the paint more often. I could also state it this way--they hold less water and so are less likely to cause uncontrollable oozles. They are easier to lay in defined brushstrokes and easier to drybrush with. My point is, they are tools and as such they do a particular job. If I have need to peel an apple I could accomplish the task with a knife or a peeler. Which is best? A case could be made for either tool. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
re comparison of series 7 by w&N and Raphael 8404--they are of approx equivalent fullness and length. I have old series 7 size 12 and 14 and the raphaels correspond--number with size and fullness. Of course they are much better at pointing and general quality than the current series 7s. I will say some other lines of raphael are smaller than the W&N counterparts, but not the 8404 series. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Interestingly, the same kind of personal product preferences and endorsements are common when watercolor paper is a topic of discussion, and also when watercolor paint brands are a topic of discussion. The wide variety of paint, paper and brush products available are a reflection of the equally wide variety of painting styles, artistic temperaments, and watercolor techniques. | ||
Whitewatercolor Intermediate Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 52 Registered: 10-2006 |
I've tried many brushes and I've never found a synthetic that holds a candle to a Kolinski sable. The sable holds tons of water and pigment. I run out of pigment fast with synthetics. The hairs separate and while I'm going back for more, the painting is drying and I've missed opportunities. I just don't think they can be compared. My opinion. I'm sure others disagree. Marie put it in perspective for me--the best brushes are only a couple of meals out... I'll stay home this week and enjoy my brushes for months or years. | ||
Terry Member Username: Terry Post Number: 40 Registered: 8-2006 |
The Dreamcatcher is my brush of choice....it's a combo....some Kolinsky, some golden fleece synthetic. Lots of holding power, pointy, springy...the best of both worlds. A great handle and otherwise appointed.} | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Kisha, many people (including many professional watercolor artists) prefer the synthetics over the naturals. One brush is not really better than another, but rather it all comes down to; one's personality, how much one can afford to spend, the type of paper used and the working habits of individual artists. A nationally known watercolor artist told me it’s best to use a soft brush on a hard paper, and a hard brush on a soft paper, but I’ve talked to other watercolor artists who like to use a hard brush on a hard paper and others who use a soft brush on a soft paper. When it comes to materials it’s always best to experiment to find your own preferences rather than adapting the methods of others. As for me, I change my brush when I change my paper. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 82 Registered: 8-2006 |
French brushes, by and large, are smaller in width compared to the British brushes http:www dot trueart.info/western_brushes.htm | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 103 Registered: 8-2006 |
Sorry, Kisha. I prefer natural hair brushes. I have never been able to get accustomed to the synthetics. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 102 Registered: 8-2006 |
How do the sizes of the 8404's compare to the sizes of the W/N's? I recall ordering a #14 Isabey a few years ago, and it turned out to be the same size as my W/N #10. | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Thanks Rekha-- I am actually interested in who, like me, prefers synthetics, esp Simmons white sables, over Kolinsky. Anyone? | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 81 Registered: 8-2006 |
sorry again, the id of the seller vradom | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 80 Registered: 8-2006 |
Good luck, Whitewatercolor. If you bought it from vdram, his feedback shows that one other person who bought the brush had to pay customs duty. Not a happy person | ||
Whitewatercolor Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 50 Registered: 10-2006 |
I did it. I ordered a 10 and a 16 on line (Raphael 8404). The 16 from England the 10 from the states. I accidently paid the same price for a 10 that I would have paid for a 12 from England. Now I'm fretting that I didn't just buy a 12 and 14, but I'll see how this goes. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 77 Registered: 8-2006 |
Read the very comprehensive discussion recently on this forum http://community.cheapjoes.com/forum/messages/25/1820.html?1153090153 | ||
Kisha Unregistered guest |
Does anyone else prefer synthetic to kolinsky. I like the springiness and the fact that you have an amount of water in a brush that is perfect, not too juicy and drippy. I find it easier to get different textures from a synthetic. I actually am talking about Simmons white sable, mostly one stroke flats. I rarely use my sables. | ||
Whitewatercolor Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 47 Registered: 10-2006 |
As far as the Brits ripping us off--I don't think that's the deal. Our money just isn't worth anything on the world market. It has less value. The Brits charge less but it takes a lot more of our money to pay the value of theirs. I'll be interested in what happens with the brush someone from the states bought. Bill has me definitely wanting a (several)Raphael 8404--like someone else I read in this forum--I am always on a quest for the perfect brush. Please let us know how it works out monetarily. If this is already in US dollars, it is one good deal. Thanks. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
I really don't want to get into shipping used brushes to people--and I have already the charitable side in gear planning to donate them. However, I would consider it a waste of money to get a Kalish (even for a few bucks) if you are in possession of a Raphael 8404. I don't know what you are expecting, but the raphael 8404 is the perfect Kolinsky brush--responsive, full bondied, points beautifully. You won't find a more perfect Kolinsky brush. The Kalish is a disappointment by comparison. However, grade school studnets will benefit from them, I hope. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 73 Registered: 8-2006 |
If you are not using Kalish, may we buy them from you? | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 72 Registered: 8-2006 |
I shall not utter another whinge now that you confirm your purchase on ebay. Thank you and thank you again, Bill | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Rekha--I just got a size 14 8404 for $88 on e-bay in yesterday's mail--it is identical to my other one which I paid $200 for--now I can take it outside without too much fear of losing it. Great brush. In fact, as I said earlier, I have a whole case full of kolinsky 12s and 14s in every brand and after using the Raphael, I won't use these others (including kalish, w/n series 7, jack richeson, rosemary etc) | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 71 Registered: 8-2006 |
Jay, I might have got you wrong, but on ebay the costs are much lower... I paid ~$80 for size 14 | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Rekha wrote: ".... My brother imported a bike from the States because it was cheaper there!" ^^^^^^ This is a common practice for astronomy gear too - for some gadawful reason the Brit distributors absolutely RIP their customers, sometimes claiming VA fees, which has been proven many times to be an illegitimate claim as far as what they do charge; sometimes 'trans-oceanic warranty coverage costs', which ditto. But frequently, for those few willing to admit the truth, "because its a customary practice"....and they ain't talking customs duty! It's a real stink in the hobby...and Europeans suffer even worse. On our various fora, we're (USA) constantly having to respond to this complaint from overseas members. Somehow they feel it's we and the U.S. factories that are ripping them off -- a position I simply cannot fathom. There are many reports of those who come to the US and buy from our distributors, return & pay duty, and still save nearly the entire cost vs buying them at home. It can be really outrageous. /Jay | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Glad you got your Kolinsky & hope you are pleased with its performance, which is /the/ bottom line, Rekha. Moot at this point, (since you've aleady got it), but I was going to say if you see the valid Raphael number & 'logo' stamped into the handle that should be sufficient evidence it's bona fide....tho that's certainly no 100% guarantee in all cases that that's the 'genuine finest Kolinsky' in all products, seeing as how so many corner-cutters are producing lesser-quality products these days, and inappropriately using the name. But as said, your pleasure is the proof of the pudding! ~8) Out of curiosity, I checked eBay....and FWIW: There's someone (says in the Bronx) selling some large Raphaels, claiming: RAPHAEL SIZE #16 THE BRUSHE SALES FOR $254. 80 AT PEARL. RAPHAEL SIZE 14 WATERCOLOR BRUSH RETAIL IS $ 220 RAPHAEL SIZE 10 WATERCOLOR BRUSH RETAIL IS $ 198 He doesn't mention the Raphael model number - tho in the pictures they carry the characteristic handle coloration of 8404's. I checked at Pearl also - and the largest (& most expensive) Raphael they offer, at least as turned up thru their Search utility, is an 8404, & it's only a size 6, selling for only $52.08 (list $65.10)! The seller's ad also states these items are new, though in the pictures they look used. Also, the shipping charge on the first shows "Not specifed". Finally, seeing as how he/she only shows 2 feedback ratings, think I'd be a bit suspicious of these 'deals'.  /Jay | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 70 Registered: 8-2006 |
Funny you should say that Whitewatercolor. My brother imported a bike from the States because it was cheaper there! | ||
Whitewatercolor Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 46 Registered: 10-2006 |
It would cost just about double, in exchange to buy these brushes from the UK--plus the credit card companies charge an additional exchange rate. My husband buys British bike parts. Once bought $400+ plus worth of parts which ended up costing us close to $1000. | ||
Maidensmith New member Username: Maidensmith Post Number: 5 Registered: 8-2006 |
I remember from a previous post or Handprint that there are some very fine brushes made by a company in Israel. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Who knows how these people get things--maybe they have a relative who works in the brush factory. Maybe Raphael makes more than it sells and these people buy the excess ones. These are excellent brushes. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 68 Registered: 8-2006 |
That's a relief, Bill. What I can't figure out is the relatively low cost perhaps that's why I was suspicious. Although the ebay site is British, the brush was sent from an address in Israel. I have looked at maps and puzzled over why Israel. Of course, you can turn around and say why not? | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Excuse the typo--These appear to be the real thing--authentic Raphael brushes. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
I checked the pictures on e-bay --there is someone selling a lot of them at a great price so I assume you bought from that source. These appear to be the real this. | ||
Rekha Intermediate Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 67 Registered: 8-2006 |
After reading so much about the Kolinsky's especially Raphael 8404 and Kalish, I ordered both. I ordered the Raphael from ebay, but I'm unsure whether it is genuine. From the photos I have seen of the brush it looks like a Raphael; the brush wets into a nice tip carries and snaps well. Are there any specific things I should look for to confirm that it is genuine | ||
Eugene Intermediate Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 90 Registered: 8-2006 |
Bill, George, Eric, and all, Have you ever gone to Robert Glenn's twice weekly News Letter at painterskeys.come Very interesting conversations that are thought provoking. You might enjoy them. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
The sapphires are blends and as such do not have the properties of a pure Kolinsky--my point in mentioning them is that are a great value--meaning high quality for the price and work very well. Working on a quartersheet would cause me little change in my brushes--I may use a #2 squirrel mop instead (which is about the size of a #10 Kolinsky round). The dragon's tongue is pure kolinsky whereas the saphire is a blend so it holds less water but gives a very conroallable smooth stroke. Some prefer less water capacity. The sapphire oval washes are especially usful brushes and I use them a lot for figure work and sky / cloud painting. They are great for laying in shadows becasue their mark is so rounded and natural. One thing must be said. Working with kolinsky and/or squirrel means you have a very juicy brush. The synthetics or blends tend to behave differntly wetter at first touch then dryer. It's all in what works best for you to acheive your artistic goals. I currently am pursuing a very spashu style ala charles reid and the juicy brushes facilitate that and so assist me in my artistic goals. Re. Robert Simmons white sable--these are nylon brushes and are quite good, but nothing like true sable. I once used them exclusively. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
I've re-read what I wrote and I can't find anything that even remotely suggests I advocate not using flats - good heavens, I easily own (and use) twice as many flats in various forms as I do rounds. My position was simply that Kolinsky is wasted on flats....I did note "other materials" -and Bill you said yourself: "Now try this with a squirrel..." I also noted "...especially blends..." as doing the job just as well, and I stick by that. Perhaps overstated, so I did want to clarify. Bill, there's something I deduce as probably the root of the difference in our thinking, or practices. From several remarks you've made, you apparently 'paint large' - I do not....probably 95% of my work has been done on quarter sheets or 9x12 at most - I've only done a couple as large as half-sheet size - perhaps I should have mentioned that earlier. I love to paint, but hell, I'm poor. Everything I've said -or recommended- works for me. My comment about 'Save Kolinsky For Rounds' was intended in a half-humorous vein. As far as habitat goes - I might be wrong & times have changed, but if ya check out where the "genuine article" lives, that's one habitat I don't think is very threatened by our numbers. People were banished to there - you won't find it mentioned in very many vacation brochures! <G> /Jay | ||
Whitewatercolor Junior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 18 Registered: 10-2006 |
Bill: Have you tried the dragon's tongue flat? I've not tried the Simmons, but I will. If you or anyone else has tried them both, I'd like to hear a direct comparison. I notice something called the Simmons White Sable is on sale in the Cheap Joes flyer. Bonnie | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
FWIW-- There is a very good, not expensive, line of brushes that are IMHO almost ideal and for those not wihing to spend a fortune, are actually one of the best ways to go. The line has a shapes and sizes of watercolor brushes and the hairs of the brush are a kolinsky-synthetic mix in which you get good water holding capasity and tip plus nice springyness. They also feel nice--very balanced. I would personally say that all in allthis is the best value brush line on this particular planet: These are the Robert Simmons Sapphires. Here's a link-- http://www.cheapjoes.com/art-supplies/4792_robert-simmons-sapphire.asp | ||
Marie Intermediate Member Username: Marie Post Number: 63 Registered: 8-2006 |
I agree with Bill. Synthetic flats are not for me, although I know a lot of people like them. I use sable flats at smaller sizes and squirrels in the larger sizes. | ||
Whitewatercolor Junior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 14 Registered: 10-2006 |
excuse me -- I wouldn't trade it any day for a round. | ||
Whitewatercolor Junior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 13 Registered: 10-2006 |
Jay, I've been painting for a while and I try to paint everyday. I paint a couple of hundred paintings a year and I agree with you that you wouldn't use a screwdriver to paint a picture. I'm telling you, of all the brushes I've ever used the Dragon's Tongue 1" flat is irreplaceable. I use glazes. I've never found a hake brush that will put on enough paint but not move the underlying pigment. I can do small passages and large. I would trade it any day for any round. If I had to have one brush, that would be it. So, I'll give up three rounds for one flat. As far as durability--I've worn out a number of rounds but I'm still working with my first flat. It doen't have to keep the point to be valuable. I'm going to try the Ranson hakes to see what they do, but I'd hate your comments to discourage others from trying a brush that I don't think has an equal for what it can do. P.S. If we want to save species, we should concentrate on our own numbers and leave them some habitat. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
One thing about his. Theortically a lot of materials will work for flats. But then there comes the time when the hairs meet the paper. Try doing a big area with a synthetic flat. It works great at first, but the brush dumps all of its water out at the first touch, then, as you continuie to stroke the hairs in the brush split at approximately the middle of the brush creating a stroke that has a big stripe down the middle cause by the white of the paper where the brush splayed. Now try this with a squirrel or kolinsky--water is released gradually and the brush doesn't splay, leaving a stroke not ruined by a stripe of white paper. Logically many materials should work. But then there's the act of painting which shoots holes in a lot of theoretics. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Kolinsky -and again I bring in my 'proper' designation- is a wonderful watercolorist's commodity. But in my NSH opinion, there are some places it's just not called for. Perhaps some will understand and/or be swayed by my logic or reasoning, and save themselves (and us all*) some money in the process. We all pick our tools for the jobs at hand -- you don't use a screwdriver to tighten a nut -- and we all know what 'Flats' and their kin are used for - cutting in corners & edges, blending, 'razor edging' lines etc etc. My thinking is, there are plentiful other materials used in flats that will do those jobs perfectly well. Capacity, edge, springiness or body - the manmades & especially blends will do it all....and the performance characteristics of fine Kolinsky are just not needed to do what flats do! Then there's the cost. Flats take proportionally more hair per brush, so Kolinsky flats will be inately more expensive, in the first place. Just 'guesstimating', the hair used to produce a single one-inch flat could probably produce 2 or 3 (depending on size) rounds. And with flats by design having longer tufts, this would apply especially so, on the far rarer long, prime Kolinsky fibers. If you think about it, the Kolinsky used in flats creates a demand on the resource, and demand drives the price up. Ergo if we don't 'waste' money buying it where it isn't needed, in the end it should help keep prices down on Kolinsky rounds - which is my '*for us all' reference above. I know there are those multitudes who "just have to have it"....but in the end we all suffer for their anality, as I see it. Do yourselves, the world, and the species a favor - Save Kolinsky For The Rounds!! ~8) /soapbox & & & I s'pose by now all ye true & faithful have received your 'Holiday' Sales flyer from Joe's. And what ho! - inside the back cover, a new item - the very Ranson Hakes I love so well & which kicked off this discussion. Not only that, but check 'em 'ere prices! I'll let y'all do the math, but I was just before ordering the 1-2-3 set (as the 'best economics') from that 'other place' Someguy's Schmartarama or whatever it's called, over Raleigh way. *heh heh* Their price - $30!! So, big Huzzahs for Half-Price Joe....made it so....way-ta-go...ho ho ho!!! @<g>@ /Jay | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
I have some large dragon's tongues and legends. Can't say that they are the brushes my #14 Raphael 8404 is. Not close. But they are very good brushes, all the same. | ||
Marie Intermediate Member Username: Marie Post Number: 62 Registered: 8-2006 |
It may be that I have never gotten accustomed to the larger Dragon's Tongues is that I don't tend to like the narrow belly, which I think is similar to the daVinci Series 35 that Charles Reid recommends. Once again, the large Dragons Tongues are fine brushes -- just not my personal preference. | ||
Marie Intermediate Member Username: Marie Post Number: 61 Registered: 8-2006 |
I also like the CJAS Dragons Tongue brushes, and I prefer them to the Legends. I especially love the flats --- one of the few flat Kolinskys I'm aware of. I also like the smaller rounds. I have a couple of the larger ones, including the #16, but for some reason the big ones have never become everyday brushes for me; I'm not sure why. They point up beautifully, but somehow the shape doesn't feel right to me in the larger sizes; it's very personal and subjective. They may be perfect for other folks. | ||
Whitewatercolor Junior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 12 Registered: 10-2006 |
This information on brushes is really helpful. I was thinking about trying the Ranson Hake brushes before I found this discussion--you've pushed me over the edge. Like most artists (I'm sure) I have 100+ brushes that I don't use and maybe 10 that I can't do without. Before I invest in the Raphael 8404 (and by the way, where do you buy them)--has anyone in this discussion used Cheap Joe's Dragon's Tongue brushes? They are my favorite brushes so far. I don't think I could paint without the 1" flat, the 10 and 14 round. They keep a point better than the legend, at least of the ones I've purchased. I would appreciate any comments. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Jay--It's the big one's #12---#16 I highly recommend. I can't see spending money on a smaller one when one of these will do your whole painting job (except maube sky washes). The smaller Kolinsky's have never appealed to me. I don't thinkl you can get a feel for the big ones by buying a smaller one. When the brushes get big, new dynamics take over. The hairs are longer, the body fuller, the feel is totally new. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
I'll have to make gettin' one of the 8404's my next 'save up' project then Bill....perhaps I can spring (no pun intended *heh*) for a smaller one, just to try them out. Gotta say, if it beats this new Kalish I just got, I'll be impressed! And back to the original subject - Hake. GO 'CANES! Whoops....wrong 'hockey'. *LOL* And Connelley, here I get to turn you on to something better -- it's my original recommendation of the Ranson Hake by Pro Arte. The Kalish that came in today - yes, it's got "plenty of thickness and come(s) to a fine edge when needed" as you said, but it just doesn't have the stiffness of the hair the Ranson does. When wet, the Kalish still gets too limp - and working with the hair tips in their 'bent' condition you have to almost lay the handle flat across the paper & paint 'upside down' with the ferrule & handle blocking your view. Also, that round handle is HUGE (and considerably heavier) I just couldn't manipulate it near as well as the traditional flat. And that Irish Goat Hair also has the tendency to release its charge too suddenly....unfortunately, much like cheaper Hake makes tho not as bad. Wet paint wants to jump out - drier paint ('neat') bends & splits the tip trying to pick it up - I just couldn't find a happy medium. You need to try the Ranson....and see what a 'great' Hake feels & performs like. Best regards, /Jay | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Thanks Jay-- I will pounce on one of those-- As I said earlier--I have a Kalish and in terms of spring, point, fullness and all of the other qualities one seeks in a Kolinsky, the Raphael 8404 is in a class by itself--IMHO much better. I also got sucked into purchasing a Rosemary--these are handmade in England and the owners are very proud that they are delivering the very best hair and the very best brush. But then I tried the raphael...refered to me by a workshop artist. Great brush. Since it is perfect, I've stopped looking. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Well, let me add one more Kudo for Kalish! I spoke with Harry about 4pm Monday...we finished our conversation around 4:30-ish. Wed, 12:26pm - UPS truck just pulled into my driveway....and delivered my brushes! NJ to NC in under 2 days - about 44 hours. Not bad, not bad a'tall. (Joe's took 4 days to fill my last order. But they're prolly busier.) *hehhehheh* ~8) /Jay | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Username: Raliegh Posted on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 1:30 pm: "I'd like to add here how much I admire 'Cheap Joe'. He appears to be a wonderful entrepreneur who often highlights the talents of those who work for him." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well, ok, go ahead. ~8) And I do too! Think he's a fine person, and businessman....heck, he was almost my fly-fishin' buddy years ago, until my trip up to Boone was terminated by a guy runnin' a redlight, T-boning my Blazer & almost killin' me in the process! Joe's built what has to be a model form & way of doing business....their customer service & personalization should be the benchmark for all companies, in my not-so-humble opinion. So, I hope we/I haven't appeared to nor given the impression of being 'traitorous', using his facilities to promote others! BUT, when Meister Miller & Co doesn't sell the particular product you wanta buy....whatcha gonna do? Warmest regards, /Jay | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Hi Bill, all; Ah so - 8404's.....you didn't say that in your original response...& I merely <Search>'d "Raphael" here in CJ's, & saw the 8424's they offered. I'm pretty 'up' on what a Kolinsky (the beast) is, & >exactly< where the 'proper' hairs come from, environment & body-wise; which why I included & emphasized the term >proper< in my remarks, since there are so many illegitimate claims by the brush industry regarding its source & use. For instance, one common practice is to use ANY hair from the Kolinsky 'Weasel', or even any member of the Family or 'cousins' as Harry called them, and the maker feels justified in calling his brush a Kolinsky. Some even stoop to bolstering this inferior hair with man-made fibers or stiffer hair from other species, which in the end still does not perform with the quality of the true, >Proper< Kolinsky brush. BTW -from Harry Kalish- (& yes, Connelley, he WAS a thoroughly delightful person) there's an almost unbelievable series of hurdles to obtaining the 'genuine article' to begin with...from where the 'good' animals are found...even restrictive to the point that while the creature also lives in the northern reaches of China, THAT isn't the 'real article' either (inferior hair quality); trapping them (pen-raised just won't do, performance-wise)....fur trade industry involving World Endangered (or 'Threatened') species, requiring MUCH licensing & paperwork -- down to the market demand which, item rarity aside, keeps the costs elevated! It's easy to see WHY so many manufacturers are so readily willing to cut corners....they just take the easy way out. "Some" brushmakers would feel justified, it seems, in using a single hair from the Kolinsky's _nose_ with nylon & dog hair, and advertising the brush as "Genuine Kolinsky Sable". I'm exaggerating - not as bad as that for sure - but not as far fetched as most might think! But why? Simply a marketing ploy, using 'cost cutting' methods to create income by enabling a cheaper-costing end product - attempting, nefariously I might add, to 'cash in' on the good name of Kolinsky Sable. A >Proper< and >Righteous< Kolinsky Sable brush is practically a work of art in itself....one might even take pause at even using such a masterpiece of creation for that purpose which it is intended. THAT, (the 'masterpiece...' aspect) more than anything, is the very original reason I wanted to own one of the "very best". But, yes (in case you're wondering....or not *LOL*)....I would at least have tried it...whether or not I eventually wound up framing & mounting it on the wall above my fireplace. *LOL* My anal-ness does have its boundaries! <G> In closing, Bill (or anyone interested) I did Goog the Raphaels and a couple of hits showed on eBay; there's some 8404's up for auction at <$100 -- a #14 at auction for $90 or 'Buy Now' for $98....but others listed in their 'Stores' section for less on 'Buy Now'. Rather than list full details, just run a search there for "Raphael brush 8404" (without the quotes) and you'll find them....in case you're in the market for some new gear. You might have a better source, didn't check elsewhere, but thought I'd pass it along FWIW. And I too will reiterate - even so, that's still a far better brush than I am an artist! ~8) Best regards, /Jay | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Here's some info copied from a website: Raphaël Kolinsky Red Sable Pointed Round Brush Series 8404 This hair comes from the Siberian and Manchurian Sable, better known under the name of Kolinsky. It is a small animal that lives in the coldest areas of these regions, giving it a very strong and dense hair, an ideal hair for watercolor. It has fantastic spring, snap, and color holding ability. The Series 8404 brush is made with top-quality construction, and is set in a seamless, nickel-plated brass ferrule on a short, black varnished handle. * Raphaël Kolinsky Red Sable Fine Point Full Belly Round (enlarge) Size 14 8.3 mm 34.1 mm List $294.80 $140.38 05048-1016 8404 Round, Size 16 9.1 mm 35.7 mm List $336.40 $160.18 | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
No--Those 8424 are tiny and nothing like the ones I am recommending-- I ordered a #8 and its the size of a #4. They are not Kolinsky and have nothing in common with the 8404. Do an internet search for Raphael 8404 and you'll find them. The proof is in the pudding. These raphaels 8404 are the same size as the w/n #7 but are as good or better than the series 7 were 30 years ago. (I bought my first series #7) in 1970. I want to reitterate that the last three workshops I went to the artists were painting with a raphael 8404 brushes-- #12, #14, and #16 . | ||
Raliegh Member Username: Raliegh Post Number: 32 Registered: 8-2006 |
I'd like to add here how much I admire 'Cheap Joe'. He appears to be a wonderful entrepreneur who often highlights the talents of those who work for him. | ||
Connelley New member Username: Connelley Post Number: 2 Registered: 10-2006 |
Hi Jay et.al Isn't Harry an interesting fella to talk to? It's refreshing to be able to talk with the owner of one of the few small art supply companies left. I don't want to beat this into the ground, but if you ever feel like you need a Squirrel Quill brush, try his #3. For 10 bucks you'll be amazed. It holds an amazing amount of water or paint, and comes to a fine point as well. Connelley | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Hi Bill, all; Would that be their (Raphael) Series 8424 Rounds you're talking about? I see Joe's only carries 3 sizes (6-8-10) and they're made of Red Sable -- which according to everything I've read is sort've an inferior grade to >proper< Kolinsky Sable. I say 'proper' as being the male Siberian, selected tail hairs, winter coat, et al. And, they're named 'Raphael 8424 Extra Watercolor Rounds' - and I confess I don't know what the 'Extra' refers to -- ?? But even priced in the hundreds - that's a far better brush than I am an artist...and wa-a-a-y beyond my means even if not my talents. *LOL* I called yesterday and got to speak with Harry Kalish (he answered the phone) - and what a super-nice gentleman he was! We wound up chatting for a good 30 minutes or so, and he shared a good bit of info about the international fur/hair trade, and how it compares today with what it used to be. Lots of unscrupulous activities in the biz, for sure. I told Harry of my old 'dream' to one day own one of the finest watercolor brushes in the world - a W&N Series 7.... but now quality issues had changed my mind - and Harry easily confirmed the state of affairs with the W&N's.....and most others! Harry is convinced they now hold title for the world's best quality brushes - and that his trade practices - the way he's run his business - has let them stay competitive despite the recent history of their materials suppliers....and I commented that I was glad to be dealing with someone who valued quality and good price. As our conversation went on, he also told me the rather involved tale of how they, once their reputation started growing (and mostly by word-of-mouth) were approached by a major art distributor, whose 'experts' had tried Kalish's brushes & said they were excellent....and they wanted to become his distributor. And if he signed an agreement they could quadruple his business. BUT, (and isn't there always a 'but'!) he had to agree to stop selling directly to artists. Harry said that during their early years, he spent countless hours traveling to art shows, conventions, trade shows etc., so he could talk with artists, to find what they wanted in a brush....and his business had been built on what they said. That made him what he is today - and he wasn't about to give that up -- Harry said "No!" -- and turned them down. I remarked that from his description of the industry, if he had accepted it seemed a strong possibility that to keep up with the volume the agreement would have brought, Kalish might have been forced to start cutting corners also, like much of the others. Harry said, in short, "Exactly!" I then said "Harry, you've got quality and price....and now I'll add, integrity - the third jewel for your crown as far as I'm concerned, and I'll be glad to do business with you, sir!" Anyway, I ordered their middle-sized (1.5") Hake (which Irish Goat Hair got us into the 'Fur trade' conversation) that was so well recommended earlier, and decided on the Series 1 (which Harry confirmed was their version based on the W&N Ser7's as a starting point) #7 rather than their Series 7 'Designer' line, which basically carries the same tuft diameter as the Ser1 but one brush-size larger's length of hair - again based on what Harry provided as to their performance & responsiveness. Saved me $5 by listening, too! *LOL* So, with quick shipping (they maintain a very big inventory) at a very reasonable rate, in a couple of days I will perhaps in fact finally have one of the "world's finest" watercolor brushes, of my very own....time will tell. And considering that the equivalent I once wanted recently went off sale at $49.95 - not a bad bargain for this ol' po' boy, to boot! ~8) Clear skies to ya! /Jay | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Kalish aren't nearly the brushes as the raphael's which have full bellies, long hair, and spring. In fact, it's safe for me to say that they are the best bar none since I have tried almost all (and spend hundreds...er wasted hundreds in the process). You can get a #14 which is great big full bodied kolinsky that points like a dream in the 100's...not the 600's. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Oops....forgot to mention: Ya, I've already given up on ever having a W&N Series 7 - as said, the loss of their (former) legendary quality these days has now shied me away. It was a dream, from LONG ago. I know an Arts & Graphics store that has a full set of Ser7's on display in a glass case...even a #14 (if memory serves - might be a 12), so you KNOW they're old. It also has a $645 price tag on that one brush! I just can't even begin to imagine paying that for a paintbrush - that's insane!! For that, I would expect to throw it against a wall & it would paint Renoir murals, by itself! I mention 'the dream' from long ago. Part of that (fantasy) was that I oughta break into that store some night & heist that 'Big-un'....just because they had the nerve to ask that kinda money for a brush....and maybe the #7 or #8 I wanted, just to serve 'em right. *LOL* Foolish youth. But about that price tag, & the rarity of that brush -- note that they still have it, unsold. Maybe there IS hope for humanity. ~8) Clear skies! /Jay | ||
Marie Member Username: Marie Post Number: 42 Registered: 8-2006 |
I tend to prefer the full bellied brushes because I can get a wider variation of marks from a single brushstroke. The drawback is that sometimes the full bellies will lose their points more quickly than the narrow bellies. I am a very loose/fast painter, and I like to get everything in one stroke. A more controlled painter, I imagine, might prefer the narrow belly. It's really a matter of preference. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Big Thanx for both those recommendations. Bill, when I said 'their #7' I was talking about the Kalish - they have a Series 7 Kolinsky line also - and my choice of a size 7 is just coincidental. I could use some advice, though. The Kalish Series 7 is actually a 'Designer' type brush - a round with slightly longer tuft, & possibly a little more 'belly' to it. Their 'Rounds' are their Series 1. I thought I might like the Ser-7 for its additional capacity, tho probably wouldn't really need that. So I'm having my doubts as to which I should get, Designer or regular Round. The Designer does cost $5 more, and a penny saved....you know. Any recommendations? Pre-C-8 it! /Jay | ||
Marie Member Username: Marie Post Number: 41 Registered: 8-2006 |
Jay, I am a big fan of the daVinci kolinsky sables. They come in several varieties with different width bellies, depending on your preference. I like them much better than the W/N's. | ||
Bill Unregistered guest |
Jay-- As one who has wasted a lot of money trying to find the perfect Kolinsky round, you can skip the W&N series 7. These days they are not well made and refuse to hold a point. I simply wasted money on ordering one of those unusable brushes! The best brush I have found --by far superior to the series 7, is the raphael series 8404. These are full bellied and they point. Every workshop I've been to where the artists used a Kolinsky, they always used a Raphael 8404. I prefer the #14. I would also avoid the Rosemary kolinsky's out of England. They are made with a limp hair that is more like squirrel than sable. | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
Thanks Connelley. I'm wanting a 1.5" anyway, & will order one from them tomorrow & give 'em a try. I've heard nothing but praise about this company and their brushes....and just might order their #7 Kolinsky also, since I've been wanting a W&N Series 7 nearly all my painting life, but price 'back then' and quality degradation 'now' has held me off. The times, they change. /Jay | ||
Connelley New member Username: Connelley Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2006 |
If you are looking for a really well constructed Hake brush, check out the ones that Kalish offers. (I tried to add their web address, but couldn't). Google Kalish Brushes. These brushes are made in Ireland and use pure Irish White Goat hair. I have the 1" & 2"; they have plenty of thickness and come to a fine edge when needed. Connelley | ||
Jay Unregistered guest |
I've tried several - the only one with enough 'body' in the hair to allow good control is the Ron Ranson line by Pro Arte....at least, in /my/ heavy hands! LOVE these - first one I've ever been successful with! The cheap varieties you find usu. have inferior, softer hair, & are money down the drain IMO. Avoid the metal ferruled ones - that's not the way a good Hake is made. Since the hair is generally softer/more flexible anyway, the ferrule will cut them frequently...spoiling paintings and leading to early demise of the brush also. Again, my opinion - YMMV. /Jay | ||
Yesbut |
I took a workshop with Ron Ranson, who wants all participants to use a large hake brush. They hold a lot of water, so it's good to squeeze some out from the top (where the hairs meet the wood) before painting. Ranson gets great results using the width of the brush, edges of the brush, as well as holding it verticle for a thin straight line. He advises using it as a remedy for "fiddling" with little brushes to paint. | ||
midnight_baseball |
does anyone have experience with hake brushes? there are a number of brands out on the market - Creative Mark Mandalay HFC ProArte Most are reasonably priced but the major differences seem to be whether the handle is one piece with the bristles sewn/stitched into the handle or a handle with a ferrule or a one piece handle or a two piece handle with the brush hair sandwiched in between. Does anyone have any recommendations on type, size and/or usage? |
