| Author | Message | ||
  Lex |
Linda, as a musician you already have an advantage I envy - a way to tap into one of the most important gifts of God. You will do well as a painter, I am confident of that. Best wishes. | ||
Linda |
Lex, the sailboat picture did take my breath away. As I gasped, I knew it had to do with the whites. The restraint used, not too many, not too few, the joy and delicacy of placement of each. The water moves me in a way I've not been moved before in paint. I must tell you I felt kundalini. The moon is exactly how I would paint it. The sky is perfect, the effect of which I had been desiring to create, but hadn't the experience. It's absolutely marvellous and I can't exactly put into words why (which in my opinion makes for extra-excellent art, that which one cannot put into words). The first picture is an excellent graphic of your ideas. It is clear and I am inspired! You have opened a door to me in watercolor I have been looking for, for quite a while. Some very serious artistic growth is going to take place -- THANK YOU! | ||
Lex |
Wow, Linda, put me on the spot whydoncha? J Seriously, I hope you won't be disappointed by these images - my description of the painting process may be better than the results. I'm way behind in my scanning (I've been doing lots of oil painting lately) but here are a couple I've posted before while experimenting with granulating paints:  The top figure is all Senelier burnt umber. All I did was swish a saturated squirrel fur quill mop (my favorite brush) around almost continually to keep the pigment swimming. As it began to take shape I'd gently push to pigment toward some areas for shadows and textures, and away from others to create highlights. After the basic textures and highlights were settled in I went back and touched in a few lines to define the figure. The middle figure is mostly Schmincke madder brown and vanadium yellow, if I'm recalling correctly. Neither is a real granulating color so the approach was different. Rather than swirling the paint around I'd lay in additional strokes to define the shape while the overall figure was still fairly wet. Same with the bottom figure, which was all Schmincke ruby red. In the next image the water was done (using mostly ultramarine and little green) pretty much the same way as the top figure in the previous painting: keeping the paper very wet while swirling the paint around. I'd protected the sailboat and foam areas using W&N masking fluid beforehand so I could swish the paint freely. The blossoms, blooms, backruns, etc., which some watercolorists work hard to prevent, were just a plus to me.  | ||
Linda |
"I happen to love granulating paints because I'm able to mold and shape them into swirls, swooshes and patterns that suggest light, shadow and almost palpable textures." That's from Lex earlier in this discussion. It's poetic and a dance of creativity, these words. Can you give us more on this, please, Lex? I want to know your finest accomplishment with the palpable texture. What do you do, can you do with the average ultramarine? Wax lyrical on the light and shadow for those of us who love to hear this, please...Oh! your information on this subject is what I crave! As for your original cobalt inquiry, M. Graham Cobalt Blue is such a consistently fine product, with the smoothness of perfectly whipped cream, and surprisingly more granulation when it dries than what one thinks when it is wet, yet so even a particle size, and this heavenly color that just sends me there. I'll never need another, nor want, and so my W&N tube just sits tried several times, yet unused and sad compared. Let us know what you've found at last! | ||
Lex |
More like a nose with no sense. J | ||
Dake |
Drollere and Lex.... I approve strongly of your very satisfactory thoughts re granulating pigments, signatures and flowers. A pigment that does not granulate is like a rose with no scent. | ||
drollere |
that's choice ... maybe it also means "got humorous sense" | ||
Anonymous |
As far as letters following signatures, you might be interested in the ones used by my art teacher, Chuck McLachlan. He is a great artist, a great teacher, and a man of no pretensions. He follows his signature with the letters GHS, which stands for "graduate of high school". | ||
Lex |
Ah, drollere, you've struck upon the reef of a couple of favorite peeves (if you'll pardon my scrambling of metaphor): trendiness among "craftspainters"; and those annoying society membership signatures! Arghh! If I wanted a billboard on my painting I'd just buy a copy of the painter's signature. Hell, it takes up 25% of the painting now anyway! I'm thinking about making this my signature:  As for my "craftspainters" remark, well, the less said the better. Another artist's experience tells it best: I recently exchanged e-mails with an oil painter (I'm experimenting with the medium and casting around for advice) who related a tale of xenophobia that made my brushes bristle. She traveled with a watercolor group to Paris to attend a workshop conducted by a well-known watercolorist. Having explained in advance that she was an oil painter, but would use only walnut oil and no objectionable solvents, she was accepted for the workshop. However once she arrived in Paris she was subjected to verbal abuse and harrassment by the instructor and condescending remarks from the group about how watercolorists are "more sensitive" and disparaging remarks about "grease painters." I expect the entire self-congratulatory lot signed their watercolors of photo-realistic landscapes with lines full of affiliations. And so I pray: "Lord, I pray, not to be a saint, but to know the difference between art and paint." | ||
drollere |
lex, the color span of genuine cobalt blue paints is relatively narrow -- narrower than ultramarine blue, and much narrower than phthalo blue or cerulean blue. color bias is not an issue. the most granulating brands i know of are winsor & newton and holbein. m. graham is powdery (which i actually prefer for this gentle blue hue), but all brands granulate relatively little, compared to cerulean blue. granulating paints are out of fashion because everyone wants to paint "flowers, crystal and light" kinds of things on full sheet papers and copied from photographs. watercolor shows are full of them, rows and rows of them, all the same, all pounded out to get that signature membership that you can initial next to your name and copyright mark when you sell the paintings at the art fairs next to the booths of corn dogs and kitchen crockery. there's no visible granulation in photo emulsions, and the goal is to copy the photograph, so these artists (realist artists in general) avoid granulating paints or learn how to suppress the granulation effects (smallish brushes, thin paint application, multiple glazed layers of paint). granulating pigments used to be prized, because controlling the granulation requires skill (rather than a slide projector and a small brush), so granulation became a demonstration of skill. a skill now largely lost, but certainly nothing to sneeze at. that is, unless you gotta have that signature membership. carrie is right ... any "art teacher" who says granulating paints are cheap simply doesn't know what he or she is talking about. in fact, for most pigments, a visible granular texture implies a larger pigment particle size, and larger pigment particles are, in general, more lightfast than small particles. ask the "art teachers" to explain why "granulating paints are cheap" and see what kind of answer they babble out with. | ||
Cathy |
Lex, I love the blue spots on your color chart. You're so artsy! | ||
Lex |
Ah, okay, I understand the problem. We're accustomed to seeing certain colors - the flag, for example - that have been rendered using dyes or inks. Difficult, if not impossible, to duplicate using artists' pigments. If you have Adobe Photoshop or Corel Photo-Paint you can sort through the selection of Pantone (or other) process colors used by printers and use them to replace the colors you've painted in order to visualize how they would look when reproduced. Here's an example: first, the Schmincke samples I uploaded a while back using Delft Blue, Ruby Red (and Vanadium Yellow, which we'll ignore for this demonstration); second, the blue replaced with Pantone Reflex Blue and the red replaced with Pantone Red.   I didn't clean up the blue spots in the second image so try to ignore those. The problem with this approach is that you won't be able to sell originals - a printer will replace the colors you paint with colors that are as close as possible to those you select. You could use designers' gouache, which would probably have blues and reds more closely matching your preferences. These would also be easier for a printer to match. I doubt you'd sacrifice anything in the way of lightfastness since the blues and reds I've seen in W&N, Holbein and other quality gouaches are all lightfast. It's the violets and certain greens that are problematic, but you may not want to use 'em anyway. Hope this helps a bit. | ||
Kukana |
Thats What Im doing. I'd just hitting a brick wall with the paint itself. Every red I mix is too orange or too pink fushia colored. The blues are too tourquoise or too drab. Im stumped. The drawings themselves are darling. I've done one that is They who...love freedom, love their heros, love America. The hero one is my favorite. It has a boy and girl, waving a HUGE flag with firemen, policemen and construction type dudes behind them. I'll phot it and post it when Im done. If nothing else I will make a series of prints and cards and sell them at the next art show with 100% of the proceeds going to charity. | ||
Lex |
I wish I could suggest something, Kukana, but most of the concepts and compositions I've come up with the past week or so have missed the mark. The only thing I've been remotely satisfied with in watercolor were some imaginary tropical fish in red, white and blue. Not quite what I'd set out to do. In the Artist Chat section I uploaded a scan of an oil painting I just finished in reaction to the Sept. 11 tragedy, but it's not especially patriotic or uplifting. Since Senators Schumer and Clinton have advocated a new stamp commemorating the fallen rescue workers I'm trying to think in those terms for inspiration - what might make a suitable postage stamp design. Considering what I'd consider the successful design of your "She who..." cards, I'd suggest you try something in that style. | ||
Kukana |
Looking for ideas to paint a patriotic piece. I want that true Red White and Blue look. Of course I'll leave white paper for my whitest white but any suggestions for the reds and Blues???? I want it as all American as apple pie! | ||
Dake |
THanks Kukana, your comment about "Bessie" is very heartening. Nancy, my website is: www.geocities.com/daki98 Dake | ||
nancy |
Dake, share with me, what is your new site that Kukana is speaking about? Nancy | ||
Kukana |
Dake, I Love your new site. You've been busy. Lots of improvements since my last visit there. Really nice. I don't know if I didn't see it last time or if its new to your site but I LOVE 'Bessie" in your blues series. She is wonderful. So loose, so free, Very very nice. Beautiful work David. | ||
Dake |
I must wiegh in here to add my support to granulating pigments. The world would be a much sadder place without granulating pigments but they do show up uncertain technique in that if a wash is disturbed it's very noticable. Most of my palette is granulating being W&N.For flesh tones and fruit still lifes etc they are invaluable. W&N also make a Granulating medium for watercolor. Also a suggestion for those seeking to exploit granulation at to it's maximum; get a sheet of Arches smooth...hot pressed...this provides better "texture" than rough papers and allows granulation to really add something special.The rougher the surface the less a granulating pigment can freely spread, the fine particals settle in the dips on the surface and run of the high points. Whereas on a smooth surface the particals spread and are clearly visible causing a more pleasing spontaneous irregular texture...hmmmmmm i drool just thinking of it!!Granulating pigments on smooth arches are to me what donuts are to Homer.......Simpson that is not Winslow. Many of you may share this delight already, if not try it. For an example of what i mean, have a look at my portrait called "Sonny Boy" at www.geocities.com/daki98 it's W&N Burnt Sienna, Ultramarine, Cobalt Violet, Cad red,Manganese blue (click on the thumbnail for a closer look at the granulation). | ||
Kukana |
You're right Lex, for my style I prefer non granulating paint, particularly for my florals which have a dreamy etheral feel to them. And just the opposite of youLex, I've learned some tricks to manipulate the granulating paints for minimum effect instead of maximun. I do like them to a very limited degree (limited being the key word) for some of my landscapes...ie burnt umber. I do however adore staining pigment. Some people hate them. I have found that the qualities that each brand posses differ greatly. I love some of the American Journey colors(cheap!) and I hate some of my more expensive ones. Paints are so fun to have and try. And I think between Carrie and I we own them all! Too many fish in the see. Wouldn't it be fun to get together and have a paint swap!??? | ||
Lex |
Nancy, that's a perfectly valid question. But it isn't a matter of quality so much as the character or behavior of a pigment. Some pigments granulate more readily because of particle size and weight. There's an excellent discussion of this on the handprint.com website: Handprint I happen to love granulating paints because I'm able to mold and shape them into swirls, swooshes and patterns that suggest light, shadow and almost palpable textures. It just happens to suit my style of working. Accomplishing this is requires an alchemist's approach, depending upon a certain type of paper, water and sometimes even brush and mood. But it doesn't suit everyone. If I'm recalling correctly Kukana doesn't care for granulating paints like ultramarine. And the samples she's uploaded here are wonderful. So it's entirely a matter of personal preference. I don't know whether a viewer would notice or even care about my personal choice of paints. But when the paint inspires me, I feel I do better work. Here's a sample that combines two granulating colors, Schmincke Delft Blue and Sennelier Burnt Umber:  While burnt umber from any manufacturer is generally considered a granulating color the Schmincke Delft Blue granulates only with considerable effort. To achieve this effect I must saturate the paper with clear water, then dip a wet brush loaded with Delft Blue into the wet paper at irregular intervals. I tip and tilt the paper to manipulate the flow of the pigment. I'm usually tipping and dipping at the same time, one reason why my backing is made of lightweight foamcore. These contortions aren't required with burnt umber or, in most cases, a light application of cadmium red - both will granulate fairly readily by manipulating the brush wet-into-wet, without having to tip and tilt the paper. | ||
Laura36 |
I agree with Carrie- granulating pigments are far from inferior, they just add texture and interesting affects that non-granulating pigments do not. A lot of the traditional paints are granulating. Sometimes it can be distracting, so one needs to make sure why you want to use them. | ||
Carrie Stuart Parks |
Hi Nancy, I'll put in 2cents on granulating paints. It's interesting. It makes an interesting pattern and texture. Your instructors are wrong to say you should avoid this reaction as it is a matter of personal taste. I personally like the results but many of my students don't. Best wishes, Carrie | ||
nancy |
Lex, Newbie question here. Why would you want a granulating paint. Every teacher I have keeps telling me to buy better paint so it "won't granulate. Thanks in advance. Nancy | ||
Laura36 |
I think you would be happy with either American Journey or Rembrandt brands for the cobalt. You will get more paint for your money, and they granulate wonderfully. I like the Rembrandt myself. They both are true cobalt, and mix great with other granulating pigments. A nice green is achieved when mixing it with Quinacridone gold. A nice purple when mixed with rose madder or permanent rose. I believe it is somewhat opaque, and non-staining. This will vary from brand to brand. I have not tried winsor newton but I'm sure you could anticipate the tried and true factors of that brand. Only thing is, the larger tubes of the other brands are more economical. If one has a tight budget, that would be my choice. | ||
Lex |
Before I plunk down a wad o' cash (and my budget is very tight) for ridiculously expensive genuine cobalt blue, I'm hoping it'll do what I want. First, I want a granulating paint, so opinions about various brands in that regard are especially welcome. Second, a guesstimate of the color bias of particular brand you've had some experience with is also desirable. I don't really care whether a particular brand leans greenish or reddish, I'd just like to know in advance what to expect. Part of the reason for my quandary is that the Schmincke catalog lists three different variations of cobalt blue, with three different pigment designations. I've been satisfied with the Schmincke and Sennelier paints I've tried so far but am not a slave to any brand - if you've tried Winsor & Newton, Maimeri, Holbein, Rembrandt, Utrecht or any other true cobalt blue, I welcome your opinion. So, if there's a cobalt blue that granulates like most ultramarine but looks and behaves differently (hue, tinting strength, etc.), please lemme know. In exchange I'll happily describe in detail the characteristics of various paints I've tried and the conditions under which I use them. |
