| Author | Message | ||
  Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 101 Registered: 10-2006 |
Well, I have to say, having worked 20 years in the chemical industry until I retired to being a financial advisor, that lightfastness is an estimate. My clients in past used to weather paints in a special chamber to guess how they'd last. But I see variants from what is supposed to happen with even Schmincke paints. But the new paints are very durable, it is true. I love the quinacridones--sad that none are being synthesized anymore (they were developed as pigments for paint colors for autos in the 80's and the stock is not being renewed.) | ||
Marie Senior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 430 Registered: 8-2006 |
That's a good point, Joanna. Acrylic may well help the durability. I think that one of the historical arguments against watercolor has to do with lightfastness. 100 years ago that was an issue, especially with rose madder, alizarin crimson, and some yellows. For the past 30 years or so --- with the development of quinacridones and some other synthetic pigments --- there is no excuse for doing paintings that are not lightfast. | ||
Joanna Intermediate Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 100 Registered: 10-2006 |
I wonder if some of the attraction of acrylic-as-watermedia is also the durability? Watercolor has an undeservedly bad rap about lasting as compared to oils. All art has its archival problems. But the polymerization of acrylic may be a solution (to some) to the fragility of watercolor. I know they behave differently and you can do different methods of glazing, but perhaps durability is another reason this is getting promoted in the journals. I've never tried it. I do have some paste-style acrylics but never seem to find the time to try a new medium out. | ||
Marie Senior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 428 Registered: 8-2006 |
I have some of the da Vinci liquid acrylics, and they are worth trying. My argument about acrylics is not so much with whether they are transparent or not --- both acrylics and transparent watercolor can be applied in a transparent manner. The real difference, I think, is in the painting process. Acrylic has a polymer binding that undergoes a chemical change as it dries. Once it dries it's there forever. Traditional watercolor, on the other hand, can be rewetted and lifted even years after a wash is done. Acrylic is not better or worse than traditional watercolor, but it is very different, even in thin layers. | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 439 Registered: 8-2006 |
I think the primary claim is transparency, along with durability of washes. It made me think of George's defense of acrylics as a transparent medium. | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 438 Registered: 8-2006 |
Da Vinci is promoting its line of liquid acrylics as the watercolorist's new friend. Has anyone tried them? What do you think? |
