| Author | Message | ||
  Robert |
We agree on this. I had bought a tube of brown madder and noticed it glazed well (glazing is not a practivce i use but once in a blue moon--usually when i didn;t get it right and am trying to deepen a value), but I've already abandoned that experiment for my usual one stroke and it's done figure work with a triad of cerulean, raw sienna, and venetian red. You are right. These types of pigments give character and excitement where the thin staining pigments often give mere tints. | ||
Dake |
Robert, My clients perfer the candid poses. I've come to learn that it's most important to try to see the child through the parents eyes. It can take time and a few attempts to understand what they're looking for, or the features they like most, or more importantly the features they dont. I usually try to make an appointment to go to the home, park, riverside or wherever the kids like to play. Just try to blend into the background until they forget I'm there. Then do some gestural sketches in pencil or charcoal, take some photos and generally get them to be comfortable with me. It helps having children of my own. Re glazing over sedimentary pigments; Trevor Chamberlain uses predominantly non staining pigments and has a practice of trying to keep his glazing to a mimimum, trying for two washes then details. Shape, form (shadow), then detail. Free use of sedimentaries kind of teaches efficient brush behaviour. One learns to get the values right on the first pass if possible because you know that > one glaze will muddy up the passage. Not only does it encourage/enforce clear thinking in terms of value and colour selection, it also teaches you to think more about the shape or form of each individual brushstroke...no wasteage. For the opaque user; planning the work is essential. However once the rules of sedimentary pigment use are understood no other pigments come close for expressiveness of mood and depth and that little chance of magical accidentals occuring increases with sedimentary pigments. I dont even like to think of them as opaque because they're not. | ||
Robert |
This may or may not suit your needs. IOsabey (and others) make brushes from Kazan Russian Blue Squirrel. This holds a lot of pigment and is so limp as to put as little pressure as possible on the surface due to its non-springiness. A number 2 is nice medium-small size. For big washes, a number #6 is useful. http://www.cheapjoes.com/art-supplies/4783_isabey-series-squirrel-mop.asp | ||
kimarielle |
Robert- I've never tried the squirrel mop type brush you recommended. Can you tell me more about it? Disturbing the underpainting can be an issue with non-staining and lifting colors. What size, how would I use it, etc? | ||
Robert |
You are right... I have a very direct painting approach and opacity is not so much an issue. I do think, with glazing, part of the issue is not to disturb the underpainting. Squirrel (such as in Isabey squirrel mops) is good for this. | ||
kimarielle |
On transparency- one of the ways that I paint is by layering many very delicate and thin layers one on top of the other. The only issue with the opaque colors is that when you do this with some of them, they don't layer well, they create mud, and you can't layer a paler color over a deeper one. This isn't true for all the opaque colors, but some do cause problems with this process, and I tend toward the more transparent pigments just to simplify things. You can also mix really transparent colors lots without creating mud or chalk. I find that when you mix more than a couple of opaques together, you can end up with muddy, chalky color. Now having said that, I wouldn't even think of doing landscapes without some paints with more "body"- opacity, granulation, etc. I really think your subject matter, and how much layering you do, determines alot. It really pays to know the characteristics of any particular paint (I say paint rather than pigment, because paints vary from one manufacturer to another). If I layer or mix Cadmium Yellow, Cadmium Scarlet, and Cerulean, I get a completely different result than if I layer transparent yellow, scarlet lake, and phalo blue. So while in theory, I agree that far too much is made of the whole transparency issue, in practice it does matter in some techniques. If you try to layer a paint like Cerulean over a darker background on cold press paper, you end up with polka dots. Not great, if that isn't the effect you're after. I read somewhere that it is like painting with jello or painting with clay. Each has a technical advantage depending on what you are after. Also, the more you layer some transparent colors, the deeper they get, while the more opaque colors are more solid layers of that same color. In any event, perhaps if I had more complete mastery of my paints, these things wouldn't matter. But where I find myself now, they do. | ||
Robert |
Dake-- I am new to portraiture and am currently working on a portrait in which I am using light washes of venetian red [quite similar (bit warmer) to indian red] for skin tones. I bought a tube of quinacridone maroon (Brown madder) and have been using it for glazing over the venetian red as an experiment. Works beautifully. Question--for your commissioned portraits, do the clients seem to prefer the candid poses or the straight on "say cheese" smiling portaits? | ||
Dake |
"too much is made about wheter or not a paint is opaque. It's all in how you use it. Consider this: cadmiums and cerulean blue would not be so popular among transparent watercolorists if they did not in some way lend themselves to transparent use" Of all that you have had to say here Robert, that last comment makes the most sense to me! Relevant transparency is no more than a pigment categorization, it has vastly less of an impact when wet and on paper. I have used indian red on the most delicate of childrens skintones. Makes it so real you can almost pinch it. | ||
Robert |
Kim- I wrote the long missive below in an attempt, i think, to justify use of an opaque pigment like cerulean blue. Truth is i have no idea how you paint, but as far as I am concerned, with my style, too much is made about wheter or not a paint is opaque. It's all in how you use it. Consider this: cadmiums and cerulean blue would not be so popular among transparent watercolorists if they did not in some way lend themselves to transparent use. | ||
Robert |
Correction: "What change winsor yellow for cad scarlet " Should have read Winsor Red--Sorry | ||
Robert |
One caveat--I don't glaze light over dark, but if I did, then of course transparency would become an issue. I find that, since I use a quite traditional and fairly limited palette, that I select my pigments and brands of those pigments based upon how they intermix with my palette. I am always revising and sampling new things but really keep coming back to what I have, through trial and effor, discover creates harmoniuos mixes in almost all combinations. That is because the results are predictable and "right" for my needs. Thus cerulean blue is in my palette because a) it mixes wonderful flesh shadow tones, b) with cad. scarlet or venetian red it mixes wonderful grays espewciall for the shadow areas in the underbelies of clouds, and c) because it mixes subtle and lively greens. It also is a perfect green-biased blue (ala Wlcox color theory)so that allows me to use it in that theortical capacity. I select Maimeri (M. Graham is similar) because of it's greater intensity. Opacity and intensity do not usually factor in because it is all in how you handle the paint. Also, pigments that are listed as transparent by the maker are , when I do my opacity test (paint a strip of the paint across a thick black permanent marker line) often the "transparent" paints are 95% as opaque as the opaque ones. Why change cad. yellow for holbein poermaent yellow when the latter is just as opaque and far less lightfast? What change winsor yellow for cad scarlet when the former is actually the more opaque of the 2 and far less versatile mixer? What is most important for me is how the paint mixes. If I don't like the resultant colors, I shop around until I do. This has resulted in a palette that is harmonious for my needs. I have begun to add a couple of convience colors becasue they are mixed from the same underlying pigments as on my palette and it keeps me from always having to mix. Also, mixing prevents charging in full bodied color into a wet wash. One more thing--some opaque effects in a painting help give the paiting character that a purley transparent, staining set of paints often can't match. I think the more traditional palettes may do this better. | ||
Robert |
I know from handprint that by far, by a huge margin, W/N is the MOST transparent cerulean on the market. This is becasue it is the leat concentrated. My own experience confrims this. Maimeri is probably the most opaque because the most concentrated. However, as with cadmiums, if you use the paint in dilute amounts it's transparent as any other. Transparency is never an issue with me because I don't use paint heavily. Ex. Venetian Red is the most opaque of all watercolor pigments yet it is my main red. I dilute it and it is as transparent as anything else. | ||
kimarielle |
Hi, Robert- Is the Maimeriblu Cerulean more transparent than the Winsor Newton? I know that Cerulean is opaque by nature, but I'd like to find the most transparent version that I can. I love the fact that the Maimeri doesn't granulate. | ||
Robert |
MB MY knowlege has definate boundaries (is circumscribed is an accepted way of saying this). | ||
Robert |
AP-- It might be the paper--In my experience I've found w/n cerulean blue granulates all over the place in washes--I don't use it--prefer the very different maimeriblu Cerulean-- non-granulating, different cerulean pigment. There are 2, the green shade (w/n) and the denser and deeper valued red shade (Maimeriblu, M. Graham, and now w/n makes one) The cobalt turquoise is very opaque, as if mixed with white. | ||
Robert |
They had me spell anesthesia and I didn't feel a thing. With cobalt, the dark meands darker value. With the cadmiums, deep means oranger. Re each--It seems logical that you could add more water to Cobalt Deep and get Light. But not quite true. I use Maimeriblu Cobalt Light. Imagine a prewet paper and imaging brushing in a dense brush load of Cobalt Light into the sky. Not matter how dense it won't go in any darker than the sky at zenith. Very convienant. If you brush in Cobalt dark you will get a too dark sky. The light paint is not made of less pigment but of a *lighter colored pigment.* Big difference. Now the cadmium yellow light is a yellow closer to lemon and the deep closer to orange so they are essentially 2 different colors, not just darker. I don't likethe Maimeri cad yellows because one is too light and the other too deep. They need one that is plain ol' mid yellow. I'd go with winsor newton cad. yellow pale, OR Rembrant cad. yellow Med. (my choice) (each is the identical hue of the other) for an all around useful cad. yellow. | ||
tachee |
To erect (such a configuration) around a polygon or polyhedron: circumscribe a circle around a square. a square peg in a round hole? | ||
Eugene |
A question for Robert. Maimeri list some of the colors as “light” or “deep”.. Examples; Cad. Yellow light and Cad. Yellow Deep. --- Cobalt Light and Cobalt Deep. Can I make Cobalt Light by adding more water to Cobalt Deep or are they really two different colors? etc. Question # 2. Was getting your knowledge circumscribed painful? | ||
Anonymous Painter |
Robert, I've always found my W/N cerulean to be 'chalky,' rather than granulating. It's semi-opaque, but doesn't seem to add much actual texture. For granulation, the W/N manganese blue hue works well, btw (despite not having manganese in it). It's also as liftable as the real thing, though more strident (might want to neutralize it a bit). I hear cobalt turquoise (PG 50) is the most strongly granulated, but still haven't opened my tube... just hearsay for now. | ||
midnight_baseball |
sorry (in true robert double post fashion) - i had to look it up: cir·cum·scribe (sûrkm-skrb) Y TRANSITIVE VERB: cir·cum·scribed , cir·cum·scrib·ing , cir·cum·scribes To draw a line around; encircle. To limit narrowly; restrict. To determine the limits of; define. See Synonyms at limit. To enclose (a polygon or polyhedron) within a configuration of lines, curves, or surfaces so that every vertex of the enclosed object is incident on the enclosing configuration. To erect (such a configuration) around a polygon or polyhedron: circumscribe a circle around a square. ------------------------------------------------ ETYMOLOGY: Middle English circumscriben, from Latin circumscrbere : circum-, circum- + scrbere, to write; see skrbh- in Indo-European roots | ||
midnight_baseball |
circumscribed - is that a medical term? ;) | ||
Robert |
Thansk--but my knowledge is severely circumscribed. | ||
kimarielle |
Robert- I think you are becoming our resident authority on colors! Thank you for the info on Manganese- I'm grateful for it. | ||
Robert |
Kimarielle-- More on Manganese--if you can find Painting with the Artist's Brain by Carl Purcell you will see a very characteristic use of Manganese blue. Note the ares that look to be light turquoise granulations. If you want that color but care nothing about gramulation (as I mentioned below) I think the very best color in this range is Prismacolor Thalo Blue or Grumbacher Academy Thalo Blue (yes, the readily available student grade paint!). These pthalo blues are very greenish (moreso that others) (PB 15:4)and when extremely dilute, make a manganese hue turquoise without the chaulky gittiness. They are also very intense so a little goes a long way. On the other hand, if you like the granulation, Winsor/Newton cerulean Blue does a nice job and is very much on the green side for a cerulean. | ||
Robert |
I think Blockx still makes genuine Manganese. The manufacturing process is supposed to be highly polluting, BTW. The main joy of using Manganese is its almost unwieldy granulation. If you just want the hue, there are several cobalt turquoise paints that simulate the hue. Not to mention pthalo turquoise (PB16) (Maimeriblu Turquosie Green, Holbein Marine Blue). | ||
kimarielle |
pthalo blue. sorry for the typo. | ||
kimarielle |
Hello, Dake- I may be wrong, but somewhere (it may have been somewhere in these discussions) I've heard that the pigment used in Manganese will no longer be available. Is that true? I noticed that W/N now carries Manganese Hue, which is basically a phalo blue. Anyone have any info on this? I don't want to get hooked on a pigment, only to have it become unavailable. Maybe some manufacturer has bought up tons of it, like Daniel Smith did with the Quin. Gold PO49. Where is drollere, anyway? He isn't answering our calls! | ||
dake |
I love bad jokes...! | ||
Dake |
Many uses for the word "floccination" come to mind. Eg Bush will ruin the whole floccination before he's done with! I'm a manganese man myself...W&N. It has a weird property of spreading other pigments though. I asked a learned man why once and never gave an answer. If anyone knows why manganese has this generall repellant quality please share.....ionic i'd expect?/ | ||
Robert |
For Drollere: A possible change in lightfastness rating for Daler Rowney Hooker's Green light (posted here as you e-mail bounces)--for Drollere: I have begun using Daler-Rowney Hooker's Green Light as a convienence mix for portraiture. I noticed it received a horrendous LF rating on handprint though the individual components--PG7 & PY 153 in DR do not. Though this is not an unheard of phenomenon, I investigated and found that though you are correct on the current ingredients of the paint, until recently the yellow was PY 169 (monoazo) which is probably the non lightfast culprit in your test. PY 169 is what is currently listed on the DR website though the tubes, presumably correct, list PY 153. Of course I will run my own tests, but I assume that your sample was older and might have contained the non lightfast PY 169 instead of the more lightfast PY 153. This is a light valued green at the 140 hue angle and is perfect for the portrait accents I am studying under my instructor (who uses W/N Hookers green--same hue angle but needlessly intense for this work)IMHO. All the best and thanks for your work, Robert | ||
marie |
I have tried PY150, Nickel Azo Yellow, from Daniel Smith, and I was surprised when W/N chose it as a replacement for PY97. Both are nice pigments, but they are different. Nickel Azo Yellow is more like a less saturated version of New Gamboge (nickel dioxine yellow). I have had good luck with it for mixing greens. I haven't tried the W/N version yet. | ||
Anonymous Painter |
By 'floccinate' I assume you mean 'flocculate,' which is clumping -- like cobalt blue. (Mnemonic device: think 'flocks,' as in sheep.) I like the PY 97, too, and bought a few tubes of the old W/N Transparent yellow as soon as I heard they were abandoning it. Can anyone report on the PY 150 (new formulation)? I mix PY 97 with W/N quinacridone red (PR 209) for a brilliant red-orange; I would really not know what to do if I couldn't mix that color when I need it. | ||
kimarielle |
Thank you so much, Marie! I will try it the Holbeins right away! You may have really solved an issue for me. | ||
marie |
Real manganese blue is unique. It's very transparent, completely non-staining, and it has more texture/granulation than any other pigment I am aware of. Cerulean is much more opaque and doesn't granulate nearly as much. If you don't mind the staining, the Holbein Peacock Blue, which is a form of pthalo blue, is a close approximation for hue and transparency. | ||
kimarielle |
Here is another question that can fit onto this board...what is the difference between Manganese blue and Cerulean? Why would someone choose the Man. over the Cerulean? I know that the Manganese is getting harder to find due to a pigment thing... I've always used Cerulean for that particular place on the color wheel, although I'd love to find a transparent alternative. The Winsor Blue Green Shade is good, but super strong (phalo blue). And (I'm really showing my ignorance here)...what does it mean when a paint floccinates? (Sounds like the lead into a bad joke). | ||
kimarielle |
Thanks, Robert- Maimeriblu it shall be. By the way- we have some things in common, I believe, the guitar and Texas among them. I was born in Hereford (probably never heard of it), college in Fort Worth, taught school in Waco, lived in San Antonio. Miss it desperately here in Denver. Thank you so much for all your help! | ||
Robert |
The MaimeriBlu version is Primary Yellow. | ||
kimarielle |
Thank you so much, Anon! I was hoping I'd hear from you. PY97 it shall be. | ||
Anon. |
The one I meant was py97. Mine's old W&N. Didn't know it was changed until now. I've had good luck with Maimeriblu paint. I would definitely trust it for a serious painting even though I haven't used this exact yellow from them. I've also used Daniel Smith and it's good too, this same exact yellow number. Mgraham azo yellow is weaker and more green compared to py97 you'll see, tho that can be useful at times. Winsor yellow is also not so clear. Ah puts mah money whar mah mouf is, cause ah ain't got much. Smart shoppin'. | ||
kimarielle |
Robert, I just tried to email Bruce and I got it right back an undeliverable email. He must have changed his email address. I did read his section on mixing greens, and he seems to favor PY97...in the meantime, I plan to purchase and try the Holbein Cad Yellow Light. Thanks so much, Robert...you just keep shooting that "torrent of short posts" at me. I'll be nothing but delighted. Anything I discover, I will absolutely pass on. | ||
Robert |
BTW (excsue the torrent of short posts)--lifting off of underpainting can be warded off by using a very soft squirrel brush --(or kolinsky). I just sampled the Holbein cad. yellow light--it does seem to sink into the paper better--possibly because of the fine grinding. Kimarielle--if keep buying and trying, you'lss soon be the resident 'authority' on yellows. Keep us updated, please. | ||
Robert |
BTW--a lot of pros use Cad. Yellow Light (or Pale) and do very well with it--especially when using it as a yellow (rather than a mixer). | ||
Robert |
You could e-mail Bruce McElvoy (Drollere)--his e-mail adrress was listed someplace on handprint. I once e-mailed him about the lightfastness of Holbein Permanent Yellow (the pigment of which wasn't listed on handprint). He did the tests and added the pigment to the site (turns out it is, ironically, fugitive). He's very helpful. | ||
Robert |
I think the Holbein is slightly finer ground and less concentrated than the W/N. I think Cad. yellow light (pale in w/n) is such a beautiful color and it mixes very subtle hues. I tried PY 97 once and didn't like the hues it mixed with blues--but that is just me. I like PY154, especially Sennelier Yellow Light version but it is less intense than Cad, though similar in hue. I haven't tried Graham Azo but have suspected it may be very good based on others raves about it. I still like the greens from daler Rowney gamboge Hue for naturalness. | ||
kimarielle |
Hi, Robert! I've always been afraid of underglazing with a Cadmium because of their "chalky" quality. Won't this "lift" or come up onto anything you layer on top of it? If not, that's great, because they are beautiful. I still need a transparent yellow for mixing greens. I am using the Daler Rowney New Gamboge you recommended and I really like it. But I am still looking for an answer to my original question...PY154, PY151, or PY97? I'm also hoping Anon will tell me which W/N Transparent Yellow... also, is the Holbein Cad Yellow Light less chalky than the W/N? Thanks for taking the time to answer all these questions... | ||
Robert |
This is not what you are asking about, but have you tried Cadmium Yellow pale or light for underglazing? Cad. Yellow is the richest, most yellow yellow available. Holbein Cad. Yellow Light is beautiful, & though not transparent it is more transparent than the competition. However transparency shouldn't be an issue in underglazing. Cadmium yellow is non staining, which is a plus in underglazing. | ||
kimarielle |
to Anon.- do you mean the "old" transparent yellow from W&N, which was py97, or the new formulation, which is PY150? Please let me know- you can't get the older formulation of transparent yellow, and the new one is quite different. You can still get PY97, but it isn't the W&N. The name Transparent Yellow is still used, it is just the pigment that has changed, and they look worlds different. Which one is it that you recommend? | ||
Anon. |
Most highly recommended: W&N Transparent Yellow. You'll be glad for it compared to the others you've listed - from experience. | ||
Howard |
One of my favorite yellows is Daniel Smith nickel titanate yellow. Howard | ||
kimarielle |
Drollere, if you are out there...(or anyone else with an opinion or information): Since I am a botanical artist, I have PY150 in my pallette (since you said it would be good for botanicals). I also use New Gamboge. I want one more beautiful, clear, transparent yellow, and I've narrowed my search down to three- PY154 (I have Winsor Yellow), PY151 (I have M. Graham Azo Yellow and Schminke Aureoin Modern in a pan), and PY97 (I have Maimeriblu Primary Yellow). Yellow is the most important color in my work- I underglaze with it alot, and I love "glowing" florals. I also do a bit of landscape painting. Mixing greens is extremely important. Any help with this decision would be great. I know I should do extensive trial and error for myself, but I should so love the input of those who know more than I do. I'm probably splitting hairs, but I can't narrow the field down any more, even after reading everything on handprint.com. Help? |
