What thickness of panels to paint on
Tony Max
paint on with oil paints?
I want smooth surfaces, so I bought a large sheet of
one-quarter-inch-thick primed hardboard from a hardware store and had it
cut there.
But the damn stuff weighs about 10 pounds for a 20- by 60-inch panel
(which is the equivalent area of a 30- by 40-inch canvas).
I wonder if one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard would be thick enough, or
would it be too wobbly for such a large size?
SKETCHDUDE
back. They needed to be supported with 1/2 X 1/2" wood strips on the back,
but they held up fine. They are about 3 1/2 feet wide and you can easily
lift them with one hand, so that's the way I would go. Just use plenty of
support.
--
SKETCHDUDE
http://home.earthlink.net/~o0sketchdude0o/
"Tony Max" <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message
news:3B591ED5...@design-write.com...
Gale Force
>
>What do artists paint on when they want large, odd-sized surfaces to
>paint on with oil paints?
What do you mean by "odd size?" You go on to
list a 20 X 60 size - that is not odd. I would
still be using stretched canvas on heavy duty
stretcher bars in this size. I've painted as
large as 48 by 60 inch sizes on stretched canvas.
"Odd" to me would be something other than a
traditional rectangle - something with curves -
for which hardwood offers an easier alternative
to stretching canvas and keeping the kinks out.
>I want smooth surfaces, so I bought a large sheet of
>one-quarter-inch-thick primed hardboard from a hardware store and had it
>cut there.
In the USA, hardboard comes in 48 X 96 inch sheets
and thicknesses up to 1/4 inch. I've successfully
painted on full sheets of 1/4 inch thickness that
was subsequently framed in heavy framing lumber.
These paintings are definitely heavy and were
commercially hung, not for someone's home walls.
>
>But the damn stuff weighs about 10 pounds for a 20- by 60-inch panel
>(which is the equivalent area of a 30- by 40-inch canvas).
These may not be considered "standard" sizes by
some frame shops, but they certainly are not
unusual sizes OR shapes for canvas stretching.
>I wonder if one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard would be thick enough, or
>would it be too wobbly for such a large size?
I would stick with the 1/4 inch for dimensions
over 36 inches in the shortest direction.
An ideal surface for long narrow paintings such
as you seem to want would be a hollow-core door
which can be purchased in the USA in standard door
widths and lengths without pre-drilled holes for
hardware. I'm referring to interior doors - they
are light weight, won't warp, and offer smooth
surfaces for painting directly or you can use the
door as a support over which to stretch canvas
in lieu of using stretcher bars.
NightMist
On Sat, 21 Jul 2001 06:55:41 GMT, "SKETCHDUDE"
<o0sketc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I went with 1/8" thickness on some arrow shaped paintings I did a few years
>back. They needed to be supported with 1/2 X 1/2" wood strips on the back,
>but they held up fine. They are about 3 1/2 feet wide and you can easily
>lift them with one hand, so that's the way I would go. Just use plenty of
>support.
Even with the quarter inch stuff, I brace anything over 24x36.
Just use cradleing and braceing like you would for a canvas, eighth
inch may be floppier than than quarter, but it is still a lot more
rigid than canvas.
Barbara
Tony Max
>
> In article <3B591ED5...@design-write.com>, to...@design-write.com says...
> >
> >What do artists paint on when they want large, odd-sized surfaces to
> >paint on with oil paints?
>
> What do you mean by "odd size?" You go on to
> list a 20 X 60 size - that is not odd.
Thanks, Gale.
What I meant was a non-standard canvas size (unlike 24 by 30 inches or
18 by 24 inches).
To get canvas of a non-standard-sized canvas through the art supply
store where I shop, I'd have to custom order it and wait two days for it
to be cut to a custom size, so a 20 by 60 is an odd size.
A canvas with curves would be an odd shape, but not necessarily an odd size.
Tony Max
>
> I went with 1/8" thickness on some arrow shaped paintings I did a few years
> back. They needed to be supported with 1/2 X 1/2" wood strips on the back,
> but they held up fine. They are about 3 1/2 feet wide and you can easily
> lift them with one hand, so that's the way I would go. Just use plenty of
> support.
Thanks, Sketchdude and Barbara.
What about one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard, which is primed particle
board? Is that archival enough to paint on?
(The primed art board from the art stores is rough on the back, but the
board in the lumber strore is smooth on the back.)
Dale Ford
I do never had any problems.
Dale
Xena
>
> What I meant was a non-standard canvas size (unlike 24 by 30 inches or
> 18 by 24 inches).
>
> To get canvas of a non-standard-sized canvas through the art supply
> store where I shop, I'd have to custom order it and wait two days for it
> to be cut to a custom size, so a 20 by 60 is an odd size.
>
> A canvas with curves would be an odd shape, but not necessarily an odd size.
>
>
Why don't you just build the stretcher bars yourself? Easy and a lot cheaper. You
can get canvas at a fabric store from 48" to 72" width. For larger canvases go to an
awning supply store. Wood is at Home Depot or any hardware store. Heck, if you don't
want to cut it yourself, they'll even do it for you to whatever dimensions you
request. If your heart is set on a wood, then try pressed masonite, it's not as
heavy as regular masonite.
NightMist
wrote:
>
>What about one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard, which is primed particle
>board? Is that archival enough to paint on?
Nobody really knows.
I read somewhere or other that there are paintings on masonite still
in good shape from the 1930's but that is about all I have run across.
It is actually a pretty new material.
I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
susceptable to damp.
>
>(The primed art board from the art stores is rough on the back, but the
>board in the lumber strore is smooth on the back.)
>
I have always been a bit of a fusser with my supports.
I get my board (masonite or cabinet finish wood laminate) from the
lumber store, cut it, sand it, and prime it myself. It's much cheaper
than pre primed and I have total control over the process.
I imagine that the primed board you are looking at is probably rough
under the priming as well. When you use the smooth stuff, it has to
be roughened before priming, particularly if it is oil primed.
Barbara
Gale Force
>What I meant was a non-standard canvas size (unlike 24 by 30 inches or
>18 by 24 inches).
>
>To get canvas of a non-standard-sized canvas through the art supply
>store where I shop, I'd have to custom order it and wait two days for it
>to be cut to a custom size, so a 20 by 60 is an odd size.
Aha. Gotcha. One of those who is lucky
enough to have someone else do the canvas
stretching for you. But why not do it
yourself? Stretcher bars can be bought in
one inch increments from most art suppliers.
Or, as someone has suggested, for really
large sizes you can manufacture your own,
although I find that cumbersome and much
prefer the heavy duty bars available from
art suppiers - UTRECHT in NYC is where I
buy mine from. I also buy my canvas from
them in large rolls.
Gale Force
>
>Why not use masonite????
>I do never had any problems.
>Dale
That's what is usually meant by "hardboard."
And that's what was assumed by others
responding to this thread, I think.
There are competitors to the MASONITE CO.
now - Masonite being a brand name. Much
of the harboard being imported to the USA
is a "no-name" board nowadays - like Masonite,
in both tempered and untempered varieties.
Tony Max
>
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:10:39 GMT, Tony Max <to...@design-write.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >What about one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard, which is primed particle
> >board? Is that archival enough to paint on?
>
> Nobody really knows.
> I read somewhere or other that there are paintings on masonite still
> in good shape from the 1930's but that is about all I have run across.
> It is actually a pretty new material.
> I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
> susceptable to damp.
In that case, I think I should seal the back and edges with acrylic gesso.
> >(The primed art board from the art stores is rough on the back, but the
> >board in the lumber strore is smooth on the back.)
> >
> I have always been a bit of a fusser with my supports.
> I get my board (masonite or cabinet finish wood laminate) from the
> lumber store, cut it, sand it, and prime it myself. It's much cheaper
> than pre primed and I have total control over the process.
At my hardware/lumber store the price of primed hardboard is the same as
the price of unprimed hardboard.
> I imagine that the primed board you are looking at is probably rough
> under the priming as well.
No; it's the same as the unprimed hardboard available at a local
hardware/lumber store, and both the primed and unprimed hardboard have a
very smooth surface.
When you use the smooth stuff, it has to
> be roughened before priming, particularly if it is oil primed.
Why does it have to be roughened?
The panels from my hardware/lumber store have the same smooth, white
surface as the hardboard panels available from my favorite art supply store.
The catalog of the art supply store says of its panels, "These
ready-to-use masonite panels have a smooth surface of 100 percent
acrylic gesso primer. Further sanding and priming can be done to alter
the surface."
Notice that it says further sanding and priming CAN be done; not that it
HAS to be done, so I assume that the same applies to the primed panels
from my local hardware/lumber store.
What's the advantage of further sanding and priming?
Tony Max
>
> > Tony Max wrote:
> >
> > What I meant was a non-standard canvas size (unlike 24 by 30 inches or
> > 18 by 24 inches).
> >
> > To get canvas of a non-standard-sized canvas through the art supply
> > store where I shop, I'd have to custom order it and wait two days for it
> > to be cut to a custom size, so a 20 by 60 is an odd size.
> >
> > A canvas with curves would be an odd shape, but not necessarily an odd size.
>
> Why don't you just build the stretcher bars yourself? Easy and a lot cheaper. You
> can get canvas at a fabric store from 48" to 72" width.
I don't have the workshop facilities to build my own stretcher bars.
I could buy stretcher bars at art supply stores and stretch my own
canvasses, but I can never figure out why artists waste so much time
doing that.
I'd have to make sure I have at all times a large variety of lengths of
stretcher bars in stock if I wanted a canvas of a particular size. I'd
also have to keep canvas in stock. That's one disadvantage of doing it myself.
Secondly, when I stretched my own canvasses, I never got them as tight
as the ones I can buy ready-made at art supply stores. They were all
saggy in the middle to various degrees and sometimes I'd have to take
out the staples and re-stretch parts of them, but still they weren't as
tight as the store-bought ones. It takes some time and effort to master
canvas stretching and I'm not sure if I'd ever get them as tight as the
machine-stretched canvasses.
Thirdly, it takes a lot of time and effort, so the money saved by not
buying a pre-stretched canvas is lost because of the labor involved.
Recently I wanted to paint a 20- by 60-inch painting. All I had to do
was to figure out the other sizes of paintings I'll likely be doing
soon. Then, yesterday I went to a local hardware/lumber store with a
diagram and got a four-foot by eight-foot sheet of primed (particle
board) hardboard custom-cut. Out of that sheet I got:
- two 20-by-60 inch panels
- one 28- by 42-inch panel
- one 8- by 48-inch panel
- one 8- by 60-inch panel and
- one 6- by 28 inch panel that I can cut myself into shorter strips for sketches).
That's five panels I can use (not including the six- by 28- inch strip
for sketches).
That's five painting panels for a total of $13 Canadian (about $8.50
U.S.), which works out to about $2.60 (Canadian) per painting (which is
the equivalent of about $1.70 per panel in U.S. dollars).
I can go to the store, get the wood cut on the spot, take it home and
start painting immediately. There's no time, hassle and money wasted
with stetcher bars, staples, canvass and sanding. All I have to do is to
seal the back and edges with gesso to protect the painting from
dampness. So why anybody would go through the hassle of making their own
canvasses is beyond me.
Tony Max
>
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:10:39 GMT, Tony Max <to...@design-write.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >What about one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard, which is primed particle
> >board? Is that archival enough to paint on?
>
> Nobody really knows.
> I read somewhere or other that there are paintings on masonite still
> in good shape from the 1930's but that is about all I have run across.
> It is actually a pretty new material.
> I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
> susceptable to damp.
So particle board is more susceptible to moisture damage than other
kinds of hardboard, such as Masonite?
I'm concerned that my painting panels be sufficiently archival.
(The girl who cut my wood at the hardware store told me the kind of wood
I was getting cut is particle board, and she also called it by another
name -- DMB or some abbreviation like that.)
Also, I'm concerned because I heard that particle board produces gas
which is toxic to breathe in an enclosed space such as a studio. (I
think the gas is used in the glue that holds the wood particles together.)
Xena
bit of paint from a tube. It isn't very labor-intensive at all and I can make a 6' x 7'
canvas for under $20 in an hour. It shouldn't sag when you put gesso on it because that
shrinks the canvas. Then again, if you don't have the time you can usually get a
college student to do it to your specifications for a fraction of the cost you are
paying.
If you can afford it, then more power to you!
NightMist
wrote:
>NightMist wrote:
>> I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
>> susceptable to damp.
>
>In that case, I think I should seal the back and edges with acrylic gesso.
A good plan, I use acrylic gel medium on the front back and edges
before priming.
>
>At my hardware/lumber store the price of primed hardboard is the same as
>the price of unprimed hardboard.
*goggle*
You can get primed board at your lumber store?!
Ye gods the amount of time that would save me on the preliminaries!
>
>> I imagine that the primed board you are looking at is probably rough
>> under the priming as well.
>
>No; it's the same as the unprimed hardboard available at a local
>hardware/lumber store, and both the primed and unprimed hardboard have a
>very smooth surface.
>
>When you use the smooth stuff, it has to
>> be roughened before priming, particularly if it is oil primed.
>
>Why does it have to be roughened?
Because there is no chemical bond between your primer and the board.
Acrylic will soak in a bit because it is water based, oil will just
sit there. Roughing up the board will give you a mechanical bond.
That is the same reason you do not want your support to be mirror
smooth if you are useing oils. Most prepriming these days is done with
acrylic, unless you shop up a place to get oil primed. Oils will
actually fall off a too smooth finish.
>
>The panels from my hardware/lumber store have the same smooth, white
>surface as the hardboard panels available from my favorite art supply store.
Boy don't I wish!
Tell me you are just south or west of Toronto, and I may be making a
trip up just to get panels! You are paying less for yours than I am
for mine by a fair bit, and primed!
>
>The catalog of the art supply store says of its panels, "These
>ready-to-use masonite panels have a smooth surface of 100 percent
>acrylic gesso primer. Further sanding and priming can be done to alter
>the surface."
>
>Notice that it says further sanding and priming CAN be done; not that it
>HAS to be done, so I assume that the same applies to the primed panels
>from my local hardware/lumber store.
>
>What's the advantage of further sanding and priming?
If you want to change the surface or add oil priming.
Some folk much prefer a rough surface. If you are going to be doing a
fairly heavy oil impasto, for example, you are best off starting with
a relatively rough primed surface, gives the paint something to grab.
Some just prefer it for stylistic reasons.
Barbara
Frank
Hi Tony,
My 2 cents worth...She might have said OSB (Oriented Strand Board).
You are right to be concerned about particle board, it is about as bad
as it gets archivally. It is left over wood by-products all glued to
gether under pressure. Masonite is a better surface, but also is
susceptable to moisture, as are most wood products. Masonite is
exploded wood fiber held together with a resin. Some other panel
surfaces are MDF (Medium Density Fiberboard) which is like super
masonite and comes 1/2" thick and up. A good thing about MDF is it
also comes in a light weight version, which is usually a special order
but doesn't cost more. Another product is MDO board which is
specifically made for exterior painted signs. It is marine grade
plywood with a kraft paper surface for a smooth and even surface. My
personal favorite is 1/2" thick birch veneer, cabinet grade plywood.
Cabinet grade has no voids inside, is dimensionally stable, fairly
light weight and has a beautifully smooth birch surface...it is also
pricey...about $50 a 4'x8' sheet where I am from. All of these
manufactured wood products need to be sufficiently primed on ALL
surfaces, front back and sides to keep moisture out. This is
especially true with masonite and MDF. If you are painting small,
nothing beats a hardwood surface. Take a hammer and saw to an old
bureau and you will have a pile of fine painting surfaces. A hardwood
panel is like a steak, MDO is a good sausage, masonite is hot dogs,
and particle board is like dog food...
NightMist
wrote:
>Xena wrote:
>
>>
>> Why don't you just build the stretcher bars yourself? Easy and a lot cheaper. You
>> can get canvas at a fabric store from 48" to 72" width.
>
>I don't have the workshop facilities to build my own stretcher bars.
I use my kitchen. (yes, I cut sheets of board and masonite in my
kitchen!) It actually makes the household happy, because I clean
madly before and after <G>
>
>I could buy stretcher bars at art supply stores and stretch my own
>canvasses, but I can never figure out why artists waste so much time
>doing that.
A preference for canvas and the desire for control over the size,
type, material and ridgity of the support. Sometimes it is because you
can't get anything premade locally.
>
>I'd have to make sure I have at all times a large variety of lengths of
>stretcher bars in stock if I wanted a canvas of a particular size. I'd
>also have to keep canvas in stock. That's one disadvantage of doing it myself.
Most people I know, do a bunch at a shot, no different than sliceing
up a couple of 8x4 sheets of board in that respect.
>
>Secondly, when I stretched my own canvasses, I never got them as tight
>as the ones I can buy ready-made at art supply stores. They were all
>saggy in the middle to various degrees and sometimes I'd have to take
>out the staples and re-stretch parts of them, but still they weren't as
>tight as the store-bought ones. It takes some time and effort to master
>canvas stretching and I'm not sure if I'd ever get them as tight as the
>machine-stretched canvasses.
Stretching canvas is almost an art unto it's self. I use board
because I prefer rigid supports.
>
>Thirdly, it takes a lot of time and effort, so the money saved by not
>buying a pre-stretched canvas is lost because of the labor involved.
You also have to consider who you are selling to. I occasionally do a
painting on canvas for someone who wants my work, but wants it on
canvas. I hate stretching, but if I am going to paint on the stuff, I
want to get as close as I can to a surface I want. The average buyer
tends to think "real art" is done on canvas, which sucks, but there
you go.
>
>
>Recently I wanted to paint a 20- by 60-inch painting. All I had to do
>was to figure out the other sizes of paintings I'll likely be doing
>soon. Then, yesterday I went to a local hardware/lumber store with a
>diagram and got a four-foot by eight-foot sheet of primed (particle
>board) hardboard custom-cut. Out of that sheet I got:
>
>- two 20-by-60 inch panels
>- one 28- by 42-inch panel
>- one 8- by 48-inch panel
>- one 8- by 60-inch panel and
>- one 6- by 28 inch panel that I can cut myself into shorter strips for sketches).
If you paint a lot on these kinds of sizes, stick to the board!
Premade canvases in those dimensions would cost a mint, and stretching
those dimensions would be a royal pain.
I assume you are planning on doing your own frameing? If not, I would
really start looking into framers now. Most of the ones around here,
either wouldn't touch anything in those dimensions, or charge the
earth for the job.
>
>That's five panels I can use (not including the six- by 28- inch strip
>for sketches).
>
>That's five painting panels for a total of $13 Canadian (about $8.50
>U.S.), which works out to about $2.60 (Canadian) per painting (which is
>the equivalent of about $1.70 per panel in U.S. dollars).
I have got to start shopping for boards in Canada!
One of the reasons I do my own cutting, is the local places will
deliver, but will not do custom cutting. Probably better like this,
if there is a mistake, the only person I have to scream at is myself.
Barbara
NightMist
wrote:
>NightMist wrote:
>> I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
>> susceptable to damp.
>
>So particle board is more susceptible to moisture damage than other
>kinds of hardboard, such as Masonite?
>
>I'm concerned that my painting panels be sufficiently archival.
>
Any kind of board that is in essence bits of wood held together with
glue is going to be susceptable to damp, to one extent or another.
I have seen instances where masonite held up to it better than other
boards and vice-versa.
I am not sure that it is of any real concern when it comes to the
longevity of paintings however. There are paintings on cloth primed
with hide glue that have been around for a few centuries. I would
think (but I have no cites to offer on it) that the average modern
board should be able to stand up as well or better under similar
conditions.
>(The girl who cut my wood at the hardware store told me the kind of wood
>I was getting cut is particle board, and she also called it by another
>name -- DMB or some abbreviation like that.)
I have seen a lot of different boards reffered to as paricle board,
the abbreviation isn't ringing any bells. I have just been going on
the premise that it is either masonite or wood bits held together with
glue.
>
>
>Also, I'm concerned because I heard that particle board produces gas
>which is toxic to breathe in an enclosed space such as a studio. (I
>think the gas is used in the glue that holds the wood particles together.)
Make sure that what you are buying is rated for interior use and you
should be OK. People use this stuff in building and remodleing
houses. If it was sufficiently toxic to pose a threat, it would not
be on the market long.
Barbara
Tony Max
>
> It's just part of being an artist, like washing out your brushes and sqeezing the last
> bit of paint from a tube. It isn't very labor-intensive at all and I can make a 6' x 7'
> canvas for under $20 in an hour.
You must be quite experienced at it then.
It shouldn't sag when you put gesso on it because that
> shrinks the canvas. Then again, if you don't have the time you can usually get a
> college student to do it to your specifications for a fraction of the cost you are
> paying.
I don't know if I could find a student reliable enough to provide me
with good canvasses on short notice, and he or she might not be around
all the time. (They tend to take off in the summers, weekends, spring
break, Christmas, etcetera.)
> If you can afford it, then more power to you!
It's a matter of whether or not the retail customer can afford it.
And twenty dollars added to the cost of a painting that's retailing for
almost $2,000 is only one percent of the cost of the product.
But as I wrote, I prefer hardboard panels because they're less expensive
than stretched canvasses and easier to get in unusual sizes.
Also, because hardboard panels are smooth, I save money because the
panels don't absorb as much paint as the stretched canvasses; which seem
to suck up a lot more paint to fill all those little depressions in the
bumpy surface of the canvasses.
Tony Max
> painting on canvas for someone who wants my work, but wants it on
> canvas. I hate stretching, but if I am going to paint on the stuff, I
> want to get as close as I can to a surface I want. The average buyer
> tends to think "real art" is done on canvas, which sucks, but there
> you go.
about using hardboard, but I haven't sold many paintings yet, either.
> >Recently I wanted to paint a 20- by 60-inch painting. All I had to do
> >was to figure out the other sizes of paintings I'll likely be doing
> >soon. Then, yesterday I went to a local hardware/lumber store with a
> >diagram and got a four-foot by eight-foot sheet of primed (particle
> >board) hardboard custom-cut. Out of that sheet I got:
> >
> >- two 20-by-60 inch panels
> >- one 28- by 42-inch panel
> >- one 8- by 48-inch panel
> >- one 8- by 60-inch panel and
> >- one 6- by 28 inch panel that I can cut myself into shorter strips for sketches).
> I assume you are planning on doing your own frameing? If not, I would
> really start looking into framers now. Most of the ones around here,
> either wouldn't touch anything in those dimensions, or charge the
> earth for the job.
I finally found a local, wholesale framing shop that makes inexpensive
frames and has mouldings and the seamless, linen liners I like.
I have been ripped off by other framers -- even ones that claimed to be
discount places tend to be expensive.
I don't want to bother with framing, too; there are enough other aspects
of the business to keep me busy that I'd rather hire a specialist to do
that and pass the cost on to the retail buyer.
I don't have the time for framing especially because I'm running another
business as a business communicator (writer, editor, proofreader,
graphic designer, graphic artist, illustrator, creative director,
photographer, Web site designer, and I'm learning Web site animation) so
framing is a whole other business specialty that's not practical for me
to handle.
And I'd rather spend my time painting a let someone else do the framing
for me.
> >That's five panels I can use (not including the six- by 28- inch strip
> >for sketches).
> >
> >That's five painting panels for a total of $13 Canadian (about $8.50
> >U.S.), which works out to about $2.60 (Canadian) per painting (which is
> >the equivalent of about $1.70 per panel in U.S. dollars).
>
> I have got to start shopping for boards in Canada!
I guess you're not aware that almost everything in Canada is a bargain
for Americans and has been for about 20 years, due to the low value of
the Canadian dollar.
> One of the reasons I do my own cutting, is the local places will
> deliver, but will not do custom cutting. Probably better like this,
> if there is a mistake, the only person I have to scream at is myself.
II get custom cutting of four by eight hardboard sheets at my building
supply store with no cutting charge, and if they make a mistake, they'd
have to redo it, because I give them a detailed diagram of the sizes and
cuts every time.
Tony Max
>
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 18:29:38 GMT, Tony Max <to...@design-write.com>
> wrote:
>
> >NightMist wrote:
>
> >> I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
> >> susceptable to damp.
> >
> >In that case, I think I should seal the back and edges with acrylic gesso.
>
> A good plan, I use acrylic gel medium on the front back and edges
> before priming.
According to the technical support specialist at Golden Artist Colors
(tp://www.goldenpaints.com/index.htm) acrylic gel medium provides a
barrier against moisture and mould damage the same way that acrylic
gesso does, and acrylic gel medium is a form of primer itself and can be
substituted for gesso.
> >At my hardware/lumber store the price of primed hardboard is the same as
> >the price of unprimed hardboard.
>
> *goggle*
> You can get primed board at your lumber store?!
Yes; I was delighted to find that out recently. That's one of the
advantages of living in a large city. I live in a city of two million
people, so you can buy almost anything you want here in Vancouver -- if
you have the money, of course.
> Ye gods the amount of time that would save me on the preliminaries!
Exactly! And the store-bought priming is better, too. Even after three
coats of gesso on my unprimed hardboard, I can still see translucent
patches of the board through the gesso, but the store-bought stuff is
opaque white, which means it's a thicker, more even coat than what I can
paint on the board with a brush.
> >> I imagine that the primed board you are looking at is probably rough
> >> under the priming as well.
> >
> >No; it's the same as the unprimed hardboard available at a local
> >hardware/lumber store, and both the primed and unprimed hardboard have a
> >very smooth surface.
> >
> >When you use the smooth stuff, it has to
> >> be roughened before priming, particularly if it is oil primed.
> >
> >Why does it have to be roughened?
>
> Because there is no chemical bond between your primer and the board.
> Acrylic will soak in a bit because it is water based, oil will just
> sit there.
Roughing up the board will give you a mechanical bond.
> That is the same reason you do not want your support to be mirror
> smooth if you are useing oils. Most prepriming these days is done with
> acrylic, unless you shop up a place to get oil primed. Oils will
> actually fall off a too smooth finish.
But I'm using water-based oils and applying them thinly, so don't you
think that paint will stay on the panels? This is something I'll have to
ask Grumbacher, because I'm using their water-soluble oils.
How long would it take traditional oils to fall off of a panel?
> >The panels from my hardware/lumber store have the same smooth, white
> >surface as the hardboard panels available from my favorite art supply store.
>
> Boy don't I wish!
> Tell me you are just south or west of Toronto, and I may be making a
> trip up just to get panels! You are paying less for yours than I am
> for mine by a fair bit, and primed!
Isn't the Home Hardware chain in Ontario, too? That's where I'm getting
my hardboard panels. I thought Home Hardware is all across Canada.
Tony Max
>
> Tony Max <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message news:<3B5B32ED...@design-write.com>...
> > NightMist wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:10:39 GMT, Tony Max <to...@design-write.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >What about one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard, which is primed particle
> > > >board? Is that archival enough to paint on?
> > >
> > > Nobody really knows.
> > > I read somewhere or other that there are paintings on masonite still
> > > in good shape from the 1930's but that is about all I have run across.
> > > It is actually a pretty new material.
> > > I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
> > > susceptable to damp.
> >
> > So particle board is more susceptible to moisture damage than other
> > kinds of hardboard, such as Masonite?
> >
> > I'm concerned that my painting panels be sufficiently archival.
> >
> > (The girl who cut my wood at the hardware store told me the kind of wood
> > I was getting cut is particle board, and she also called it by another
> > name -- DMB or some abbreviation like that.)
> >
> >
> > Also, I'm concerned because I heard that particle board produces gas
> > which is toxic to breathe in an enclosed space such as a studio. (I
> > think the gas is used in the glue that holds the wood particles together.)
>
> Hi Tony,
>
> My 2 cents worth...She might have said OSB (Oriented Strand Board).
I think she said MDF -- I remember it had an "M" in it and there was on
"O" in it -- but the wood is only one-eighth-inch thick and is a regular
item, and she also called it particle board. I'll have to ask someone
else next time I'm at the store.
> You are right to be concerned about particle board, it is about as bad
> as it gets archivally. It is left over wood by-products all glued to
> gether under pressure. Masonite is a better surface, but also is
> susceptable to moisture, as are most wood products. Masonite is
> exploded wood fiber held together with a resin. Some other panel
> surfaces are MDF (Medium Density Fiberboard) which is like super
> masonite and comes 1/2" thick and up. A good thing about MDF is it
> also comes in a light weight version, which is usually a special order
> but doesn't cost more. Another product is MDO board which is
> specifically made for exterior painted signs. It is marine grade
> plywood with a kraft paper surface for a smooth and even surface. My
> personal favorite is 1/2" thick birch veneer, cabinet grade plywood.
> Cabinet grade has no voids inside, is dimensionally stable, fairly
> light weight and has a beautifully smooth birch surface...it is also
> pricey...about $50 a 4'x8' sheet where I am from. All of these
> manufactured wood products need to be sufficiently primed on ALL
> surfaces, front back and sides to keep moisture out. This is
> especially true with masonite and MDF. If you are painting small,
> nothing beats a hardwood surface. Take a hammer and saw to an old
> bureau and you will have a pile of fine painting surfaces.
But then I'd have no place left to store my socks.
> A hardwood
> panel is like a steak, MDO is a good sausage, masonite is hot dogs,
> and particle board is like dog food...
Interesting analogy. Thanks, Frank.
Dik F. Liu
verti...@hotmail.com (Frank) writes:
> Some other panel surfaces are MDF (Medium Density Fiberboard) which is like
super masonite and comes 1/2" thick and up. A good thing about MDF is it also
comes in a light weight version, which is usually a special order but doesn't
cost more. Another product is MDO board which is specifically made for
exterior painted signs.<
Weren't you the one who told me - some seventeen years ago - that if you nail a
nail to a tree about one foot above the soil, that nail will stay in the same
elevation as the tree grows? I have yet tested your theory.
FWIW, these days I paint on door skin cradled on the back with a 3/4 birch
plywood frame. It is light weight and inexpensive.
Dik
Tony Max
> be on the market long.
You have been mislead into complacency. Aspartame is known to be highly
toxic, but it's legal. Silicone breast implants were legal for a long
time, as was asbestos in buldings and faulty wiring in MD-11 aircraft.
Household pesticides and herbicides are toxic. Carpets are hightly toxic
because they store toxins. Most shampoos are toxic because they contain
sodium laulel sulphate, which is known to cause cancer. The smog in
Vancouver is toxic and the provincial health minister announced that an
it is responsible for an estimated 8,000 annual hospital visits because
it gives people respiratory problems. My drinking water is toxic because
of the bacteria, lead, chlorine and other chemicals it it and so I
filter it. The U.S. Center for Disease Control estimated that 20,000
Americans die each year from properly prescribed drugs which are toxic
to the patients that take them and the doctors cause toxicity because
they push the toxic drugs. Cows' milk and meat are toxic because of the
hormones injected into the cows. Non-organic foods are toxic and some
imported, sprayed fruits and vegetables have been found to have toxins
hundreds of times above the allowable limit and the heads of the U.S.
and Canadian agricultural inspection agencies both said they boil their
fruits and vegetables because they are aware of the toxic pesticides and
herbides sprayed onto the food. Cellular phones are cancer-causing and a
phone manufacturer was recently found to be secretly researching cancer
shields for them. Many artists' materials are toxic and have cancer
warnings on them. Our local water is so toxic that on hot, summer days,
the government posts warnings at the beaches of the toxicity caused by
fecal coliform bacteria. And I could go on.
Why do you think one in three Americans and Canadians die of cancer?
It's because we are surrounded by toxins and the toxins are absorbed
into our bodies.
Marilyn Welch
I was told to put 1" x 1" on the back around the edges with glue.
M.
wq...@victoria.tc.ca
Victoria BC Canada
NightMist
wrote:
>
>According to the technical support specialist at Golden Artist Colors
>(tp://www.goldenpaints.com/index.htm) acrylic gel medium provides a
>barrier against moisture and mould damage the same way that acrylic
>gesso does, and acrylic gel medium is a form of primer itself and can be
>substituted for gesso.
Yep. I use gesso over the medium though, I don't fancy the color of
the board without it. I love Golden by the way, my brand of choice.
They not only have good product, but they answer inquiries quickly and
clearly.
>
>
>Roughing up the board will give you a mechanical bond.
>> That is the same reason you do not want your support to be mirror
>> smooth if you are useing oils. Most prepriming these days is done with
>> acrylic, unless you shop up a place to get oil primed. Oils will
>> actually fall off a too smooth finish.
>
>But I'm using water-based oils and applying them thinly, so don't you
>think that paint will stay on the panels? This is something I'll have to
>ask Grumbacher, because I'm using their water-soluble oils.
Doesn't matter. Once the water evaporates they still have to dry by
oxidation, just like traditional oils. You have to recall that the
only significant chemical difference between trad oils and water
miscible oils is an emulsifier. You should treat them like trad oils
in every way but clean up. I think the thinner paint film is at less
risk on a smooth surface than a thick one, but it will probably be
more prone to damage. Bear in mind you don't have to be painting on
sandpaper just to avoid flaking, portrait linen is pretty smooth after
all, but I would either skip on a mirror finish, or look into oil
priming where you could put it on a roughed up board and then smooth
it to you hearts content.
>
>How long would it take traditional oils to fall off of a panel?
Depends on a lot of things, includeing enviromental factors.
The ones I have seen start flaking fast (within a decade or 2)
included some fairly thick impasto. First the heaviest sections went
and then the rest started to follow. These were paintings done on
lucite, and hung on the second floor of a coffeehouse. I also see
where the paint is flaking on a thickly done (not quite impasto)
canvas that was given to me. It is dated 1968 on the back.
>>
>> Boy don't I wish!
>> Tell me you are just south or west of Toronto, and I may be making a
>> trip up just to get panels! You are paying less for yours than I am
>> for mine by a fair bit, and primed!
>
>Isn't the Home Hardware chain in Ontario, too? That's where I'm getting
>my hardboard panels. I thought Home Hardware is all across Canada.
I have had friends take me to a lot of places, but when we needed
hardware, we went to Canadian Tire. I will keep my eyes open for Home
Hardware.
Barbara
NightMist
wrote:
>If it was sufficiently toxic to pose a threat, it would not
>> be on the market long.
>
>You have been mislead into complacency. Aspartame is known to be highly
>toxic, but it's legal. Silicone breast implants were legal for a long
Tony, distilled water is toxic if you get to much of it.
There is toxic, and there is Toxic.
I remember a report that came out in the late '70s that called for the
banning of cast iron cookware because some genius somewhere did a
study that concluded that meat cooked in cast iron frying pans was
carcinogenic.
And then you have shrub's boy Graham coming out lately and suggesting
a little smog and dioxin might be a good thing.
Both extreme ends of the poison spectrum.
The only thing a body can do is stay informed. If you are fretting
about your materials, research them. But remember, what is safe as
mothers milk today, may be up for the all time greatest enviromental
poison award in a couple of decades, and what they are telling you is
toxic today may be offered up as the safe alternative in a few years.
BTW, aspartame in _excess_ is bad for you, just like a lot of other
things. If it were truly toxic we would all be dead, every human
(except phenylkeutronics) eats it unisolated in protein every day of
our lives. Any amino acid is lethal if you od on it. Just like
almost everything else in the world. And that is what aspartame is, 2
amino acids and a lot of cornstarch.
Barbara
Gale Force
>So why anybody would go through the hassle of making their own
>canvasses is beyond me.
I won't bother explaining other than to say
that most long-time artists usually prefer
the degree of control the "do-it-yourself"
gives them. There is something distinctly
"cold" and "hard" about painting on hardboard
all of the time that painting on canvas
doesn't have. I've been painting for over
35 years now and still paint on hardboard
on occasion - but not when I'm "serious" about
my finished product. I use hardboard for the
convenience when painting plein air.
And I have bought
the pre-stretched and primed canvases on many
occasions, but never ever have used them for
paintings I planned to sell - they are simply
too cheaply made - canvas too thin, priming
too imperfect etc. Maybe Canadian products are
better made than those found in the USA. I
wouldn't know. I do know that most of the
hardboard imported to the USA is made in Canada.
Frank
> >> be on the market long.
> >
> >You have been mislead into complacency. Aspartame is known to be highly
> >toxic, but it's legal.
Aspartame is made up of three chemicals: Aspartic acid, phenylalanine,
and methanol. Phenylalanine, is a brain neurotransmitters. Aspartic
acid is an amino acid. Taken in its free form (unbound to proteins) it
significantly raises the blood plasma level of aspartate and
glutamate. The excess aspartate and glutamate in the blood plasma
shortly after ingesting aspartame or products with free glutamic acid
(glutamate precursor) leads to a high level of those neurotransmitters
in certain areas of the brain. This combination of brain chemicals
are sometimes prescribed to alleviate depression because they act
directly on the brain by being allowed through the brain/blood
barrier.
In other words: Drink Diet Coke and feel really good so you'll drink
more Diet Coke....
Frank
Gale Force
>If you look closely as you work you can see the tightening effect of each
>staple.
You didn't emphasize the important point of
working the staples from the center of EACH
side toward the corners, alternating from
one side to the next as you turn the canvas
and staple on all four sides in succession.
Once you get within a two staples of a
corner you can finish out each corner in turn.
I use canvas pliers specially made for
stretching canvas - definitely needed when
stretching larger sizes.
>Then, use a plastic plant sprayer, set to produce mist
Might I suggest a large sponge, loaded with
water. The reason the sponge works better is
that as you rub you break down the sizing
on the canvas that is keeping the water
beaded up if you only spray. I wet BOTH
sides of the canvas this way, as well as the
wrap-around on the edges. My gesso then soaks
all the way through the canvas, as seen when
I look at the back side, and that's what I
strive for. The more the canvas threads are
covered with gesso, the less chance there
is for mold or mildew to set in the future.
Expatriate
I'm going to bed, and I am not getting up again, ever!
Regards....
Expatriate
Tony is concerned with the archival quality of the support. Painting on the
"raw canvas" hardly squares with that concern, does it?
Also, why staples, other than they are convenient? Copper plated steel tacks
offer much more to history than do staples. I don't know of any quality
painters in any of the galleries around here who are using staples and am
surprised to hear that you do, as I have always thought of you in the "quality"
league. (I still do. Just surprised.)
Other than these two points, painting in the raw, so to speak, and using
staples, your post to Tony was very much what I would have written.
Regards...
Dan Fox wrote:
> I stretch my canvases myself for two reasons - money, of course, and the
> unprimed canvas provides a texture that is impossible to get with primed
> canvas.
>
> You can't get your canvas stretched as tight as the machine-stretched
> variety, but you don't have to for successful, non-sagging supports. To do
> so: stretch the canvas as tight as you can using a stretching tool. Use a
> LOT of staples. Be sure to staple one side with maybe three staples, then
> go to the opposite side to keep things even. Then add staples. It takes a
> little practice but is worth it.
>
> If you look closely as you work you can see the tightening effect of each
> staple. Then, use a plastic plant sprayer, set to produce mist, and spray
> the entire canvas with water. Get the sides, too. This tightens the canvas
> immediately. Gessoing also increases the tension, or you can paint on the
> raw canvas.
>
> Xena <nom...@never.com> wrote:
> > It's just part of being an artist, like washing out your brushes and
> > sqeezing the last bit of paint from a tube. It isn't very labor-intensive
> > at all and I can make a 6' x 7' canvas for under $20 in an hour. It
> > shouldn't sag when you put gesso on it because that shrinks the canvas.
> > Then again, if you don't have the time you can usually get a college
> > student to do it to your specifications for a fraction of the cost you
> > are paying.
>
> --
> Dan
>
> 'The self, violent and constant, is the subject of all art.' - Barnett
> Newman http://www.danfoxart.com
Expatriate
Oh, by the way, regarding agreeing with the rest of your post, I have to beg
out of the part about gesso. I started out using glue sizing and oil priming,
and happily went along until I read a piece by a couple of fellows at the
National Gallery of Art, who did a "study" comparing gessoed canvases vs. oil
primed. They concluded that regarding humidity, gesso was better than oil
priming. But that's all they were interested in, being themselves art
restorers and concerned only with that aspect of the problem of long-term
"keeping" of the art work.
At any rate, I switched to gesso, and used it for a few years. Then, while
restretching one of the earliest gessoes, I discovered that the canvas was not
nearly so flexible as were those painted on oil priming. After some
experimenting of my own, I shoved the prepared gessoed canvases to the back of
my storage room, and for many years now have returned to glue sizing and oil
priming. (Yes, lead! Toxic as hell and I love it, right up there with the
flake white of my choice!)
But even during the gesso days, I never heard of massive spraying or sponging
to shrink the canvas before gessoing. I have used a few spritzes to get the
occasional bump out of a canvas, usually where I have knocked it against
something and slightly deformed the surface. But that's all. In my
experience, the gesso then, and the glue size now, bring about all the
shrinking that is necessary to make the canvas drum tight.
Final note: I could not agree more with your statement that only by starting
with raw canvas and doing the work yourself, can you get that wonderful, ideal
surface. I am not opposed to convenience, but every art has its craft, and
working at it is part of the price we pay.
Regards, again....
Expatriate
Maybe we should define "raw" as in "raw canvas." To me, it means unsized,
unprimed, absolutely naked from the loom canvas, be it cotton or the Belgian
linen that I use. I cannot imagine anyone advocating oil painting on that kind
of raw, given what the oils do to the fibers.
I use tacks because I believe that the fabric I use, and the custom-made
stretchers -- by John Annesley out in Calif. -- deserve to be treated with
respect, even if my work often leaves much to be desired. I do believe I fit
into the "traditionalist" category you mentioned. Amazes me that the pros on
the East Coast are stapling, instead of tacking. But hey, it takes all kinds.
As far as the galleries having a vested interest in the pieces they sell, that
goes without argument. The destruction of the fibers from the oils isn't going
to be apparent while any of us is still alive. But should we by accident
produce something that is still around a century or so in the future, it will
be ready to flake into dust. The gallery owner of today doesn't give a rat's
ass for what might happen a century from now. I don't have definitive stats on
that, but I know a lot of them and doubt that I'd get anything but chuckles if
I were to ask the level of their future concern. I agree, they do check for
quality of the support, because what the patron sees from the back, very often
clinches the sale of the front.
I live, work, reproduce, revel in the art center of America...Detroit!
Regards....
NightMist
<joseph...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>Dan...
>
>Oh, by the way, regarding agreeing with the rest of your post, I have to beg
>out of the part about gesso. I started out using glue sizing and oil priming,
>and happily went along until I read a piece by a couple of fellows at the
>National Gallery of Art, who did a "study" comparing gessoed canvases vs. oil
>primed. They concluded that regarding humidity, gesso was better than oil
>priming. But that's all they were interested in, being themselves art
>restorers and concerned only with that aspect of the problem of long-term
>"keeping" of the art work.
>
>At any rate, I switched to gesso, and used it for a few years. Then, while
>restretching one of the earliest gessoes, I discovered that the canvas was not
>nearly so flexible as were those painted on oil priming. After some
>experimenting of my own, I shoved the prepared gessoed canvases to the back of
>my storage room, and for many years now have returned to glue sizing and oil
>priming. (Yes, lead! Toxic as hell and I love it, right up there with the
>flake white of my choice!)
>
Back in the mid-70s, I took private lessons with a guy. It was the
first time I got hands on experience in stretching canvases. He was
very big on treating the back of the canvas, it was a sort of cross
laminateing procedure, useing strips of linen and hide glue with a
final coating of some unknown formula of his. He said it was to
reduce the flexibility of the finished painting, and to inhibit
humidty through the back of the canvas.
Do oil painters who use the old style hide glue size and prime still
do this? I rather figure that you don't if you are shooting for more
flexible than acrylic, but is it still taught and considered an
important thing?
Barbara
Expatriate
had one.)...
I think your 1970s fellow was doing something on his own, for reasons of his own
which seem quite valid, at least, as to minimizing the effects of humidity. I've
never heard of deliberately treating the back of the canvas for that purpose, but
I'd never criticize anyone for it. I don't personally have an art conservator in
my circle and so can't even ask, but certainly somebody else out there will have
some information on this.
As to minimizing the flexibility of the painting, about that I wonder. Humidity
cannot ever be completely controlled except in a humidor room next to the good
cigars. Humidity is a fact of life in every climate, if more in some than in
others. The flexibility of the support does much to preserve the painting from the
cycles of humidity, and by deliberately eliminating that flexibility, I believe one
would be encouraging crackling of the surface, thus, doing more harm than good.
I don't know of anyone who is teaching this, and most certainly, I would not
recommend it. Your 1970s person, however, was doing his own thing, and that we do
encourage, don't we!
Regards....
Tony Max
> priming where you could put it on a roughed up board and then smooth
> it to you hearts content.
What kind of roughed up board do you recommend?
You're sure it's not good enough to sand acrylic-gessoed hardboard?
I called Home Hardware and the manager of the lumber department said he
has no idea if the hardboard is primed with acrylic or oil.
He also said all the hardboard is for interior use only.
Tony Max
There's a doctor in Miami who's collected 700 different medical reports
on the toxicity of Aspartame, and there are more reports of Aspartame's
toxicity to the U.S. Food and Drug administration than all other foods combined.
The U.S. pilots' association warns commercial pilots not to consume food
with Aspartame because it can cause seizures. It can also cause brain
tumors and dozens of other maladies and diseases. It is poisonous.
Tony Max
> things. If it were truly toxic we would all be dead
Nonsense.
That's like saying that if smoking were truly toxic, all smokers would
be dead.
Not all smokers die of smoking. That doesn't mean smoking isn't highly
toxic, or that smoking doesn't cause diseases and kill people.
Tony Max
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 03:15:07 GMT, Tony Max <to...@design-write.com>
> wrote:
>
> >If it was sufficiently toxic to pose a threat, it would not
> >> be on the market long.
> >
> >You have been mislead into complacency. Aspartame is known to be highly
> >toxic, but it's legal. Silicone breast implants were legal for a long
>
> Tony, distilled water is toxic if you get to much of it.
>
> There is toxic, and there is Toxic.
>
> I remember a report that came out in the late '70s that called for the
> banning of cast iron cookware because some genius somewhere did a
> study that concluded that meat cooked in cast iron frying pans was
> carcinogenic.
> And then you have shrub's boy Graham coming out lately and suggesting
> a little smog and dioxin might be a good thing.
>
> Both extreme ends of the poison spectrum.
>
> The only thing a body can do is stay informed. If you are fretting
> about your materials, research them. But remember, what is safe as
> mothers milk today, may be up for the all time greatest enviromental
> poison award in a couple of decades, and what they are telling you is
> toxic today may be offered up as the safe alternative in a few years.
There would be no point in staying informed and researching health
issues if most of the health claims pro or con proved to be false.
Most claims of toxicity are valid and remain valid and it's uncommon for
something to be found toxic and then to have the finding reversed.
It's more common to have products that are claimed to be safe by the
manufacturers tryiing to make a profit and then evidence comes out that
the products are toxic.
I don't know who shrub's boy Graham is but it doesn't sound like a
peer-review, scientific study from a respected medical journal. And even
if it were, it's unlikely to be true because there's a mountain of
evidence to the contrary.
And I don't know if cooking in iron pots is toxic or not because I
haven't researched the issue.
Gale Force
>However, I've painted on raw canvas,
>leaving portions of the canvas bare (with no gesso) for 25 years and never
>had a problem with mould or mildew. I wet the canvas simply to tighten it.
>Conservators?
That's fine as long as you're using acrylics
but you wouldn't want to paint with oils on
raw canvas. It's not the mildew you have to
worry about with oils but rather the destructive
nature of the oil paint constituents themselves
on the longevity of the canvas. If you're just
a hobby painter with no concerns for longevity,
then none of this matters really. The canvas will
probably last your lifetime anyway.
Tony Max
> Oils will actually fall off a too smooth finish.
This contradicts the catalog put out by my favorite art store, which
says that, "These ready-to-use masonite panels have a smooth surface of
100 percent acrylic gesso primer. Further sanding and priming can be
done to alter the surface."
Is Barbara right or is the catalog right?
Gale Force
>I use tacks because I believe
I know of NO artists using tacks any longer,
and I must tell you I know LOTS of artists.
The convenience of the staple gun has made
tacks passe, in my experience. But if you
are a "traditionalist" or just plain "old
fashioned" then tack away! I have been painting
now for nigh on 40 years and have ALWAYS used
staples, shot from a staple gun - never tacks.
I agree fully with your admonitions about
painting "with OILS" on unprimed canvas, be
it linen or cotton - but especially not on
cotton which is much more vulnerable to rotting
than is linen.
On the other hand, I know of
no reason to prime before painting with acrylics
since most artists use acrylic gesso as the
primer, which is the same chemistry as the
paint - not so when you use oils. On the other
hand, I would be cautious about leaving raw
canvas "unpainted" - I'd opt for sealing it
with clear acrylic varnish if the look of
unpainted canvas is important to the work.
Tony Max
> risk on a smooth surface than a thick one, but it will probably be
> more prone to damage.
A thinner paint film will probably be more prone to damage? I thought
the thicker the paint film, the more likely the damage.
Bear in mind you don't have to be painting on
> sandpaper just to avoid flaking, portrait linen is pretty smooth after
> all, but I would either skip on a mirror finish, or look into oil
> priming where you could put it on a roughed up board and then smooth
> it to you hearts content.
I'd rather get primed board and sand only, instead of buying rough
boards and then having to gesso AND sand, which would add up to a lot of
extra time and effort in the long run.
(And sanding scores of wooden panels is not my idea of contenting my
heart. It sounds tedious.) :-)
Gale Force
All of the questions regarding "conservators"
and "conservation" and archivalness once again
give me the opportunity to point out the very
excellent web site:
http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/waac/
The WESTERN ASSOCIATION OF ART CONSERVATORS
site has tons of information on issues related
to the subject of paintings and other art
works. You have to do a bit of browsing on
the site to find what you want, but it's worth
the effort since many of the papers in the
sites own archives are technical papers written
by experts on the subject.
Not to say there isn't controversy. As with
everything these days, everyone has a theory
about what works best.
Dik F. Liu
<to...@design-write.com> writes:
>
>Oil-based gesso is at art stores?
>
Oil priming white is what you get at art stores. Oil-based gesso is an
altogether different beast. You have to make it yourself; and it is pretty
involved.
First, you have to size the canvas with a rabbit-skin glue solution - one part
rabbit skin powder to ten parts water.
Then, mix together one part rabbit skin glue solution, one part titanium white
powder, and one part chalk or marble dust. Mix thoroughly in low heat and don't
boil it. This is your traditional basic gesso.
Now you are ready to turn this basic gesso into an oil-based gesso. Turn off
the heat and add another part of linseed oil and try mixing the oil and the
basic gesso together. They won't mix, at least not at first. Just keep mixing.
The trick is to mix oil into the gesso AS IT IS COOLING. At one point, the oil
and gesso will mix together into an emulsion. This it is: oil-based gesso,
sometimes call an oil emulsion gesso.
Apply two to three coats of this gesso to your canvas in opposite direction.
Sand lightly between coats. After the last coat, sand it down lightly and then
apply a VERY thin coat of thin-down damar (one part damar to four part turp) to
it. Sand lightly again and brush on a coat of warm water. Wait at least a
couple of months before painting on the canvas. Your painting will have a
perfectly matte surface.
As I said, this is very involved, which is why few artists make this these
days.
Dik
Dale Ford
the group of seven used to paint on. Different terminology I guess.
Dale
Gale Force wrote:
> In article <3B5A4909...@mb.sympatico.ca>, bdf...@mb.sympatico.ca says...
> >
> >Why not use masonite????
> >I do never had any problems.
> >Dale
>
> That's what is usually meant by "hardboard."
> And that's what was assumed by others
> responding to this thread, I think.
> There are competitors to the MASONITE CO.
> now - Masonite being a brand name. Much
> of the harboard being imported to the USA
> is a "no-name" board nowadays - like Masonite,
> in both tempered and untempered varieties.
Tony Max
>
> Tony Max <to...@design-write.com> wrote in message news:<3B5B32ED...@design-write.com>...
> > NightMist wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:10:39 GMT, Tony Max <to...@design-write.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >What about one-eighth-inch-thick hardboard, which is primed particle
> > > >board? Is that archival enough to paint on?
> > >
> > > Nobody really knows.
> > > I read somewhere or other that there are paintings on masonite still
> > > in good shape from the 1930's but that is about all I have run across.
> > > It is actually a pretty new material.
> > > I don't know much about particle board except that it is very
> > > susceptable to damp.
> >
> > So particle board is more susceptible to moisture damage than other
> > kinds of hardboard, such as Masonite?
> >
> > I'm concerned that my painting panels be sufficiently archival.
> >
> > (The girl who cut my wood at the hardware store told me the kind of wood
> > I was getting cut is particle board, and she also called it by another
> > name -- DMB or some abbreviation like that.)
> >
> >
> > Also, I'm concerned because I heard that particle board produces gas
> > which is toxic to breathe in an enclosed space such as a studio. (I
> > think the gas is used in the glue that holds the wood particles together.)
>
> Hi Tony,
>
> My 2 cents worth...She might have said OSB (Oriented Strand Board).
> You are right to be concerned about particle board, it is about as bad
> as it gets archivally. It is left over wood by-products all glued to
> gether under pressure. Masonite is a better surface, but also is
> susceptable to moisture, as are most wood products. Masonite is
> exploded wood fiber held together with a resin. Some other panel
> surfaces are MDF (Medium Density Fiberboard) which is like super
> masonite and comes 1/2" thick and up. A good thing about MDF is it
> also comes in a light weight version, which is usually a special order
> but doesn't cost more. Another product is MDO board which is
> plywood with a kraft paper surface for a smooth and even surface. My
> personal favorite is 1/2" thick birch veneer, cabinet grade plywood.
> Cabinet grade has no voids inside, is dimensionally stable, fairly
> light weight and has a beautifully smooth birch surface...it is also
> pricey...about $50 a 4'x8' sheet where I am from. All of these
> manufactured wood products need to be sufficiently primed on ALL
> surfaces, front back and sides to keep moisture out. This is
> especially true with masonite and MDF. If you are painting small,
> nothing beats a hardwood surface. Take a hammer and saw to an old
> bureau and you will have a pile of fine painting surfaces. A hardwood
> panel is like a steak, MDO is a good sausage, masonite is hot dogs,
> and particle board is like dog food...
I went to another store and was told they're out of stock of all MDF and
I that I can't order any MDO there.
They had the same kind of smooth, primed, white hardboard I got at Home
Hardware. It was labelled at this second store as "D grade" and
"Standard Grade", which doesn't sound good.
What about one-quarter-inch oak plywood?
It's smooth -- but not super smooth -- on one side, so it wouldn't have
to be sanded to get oil paint to adhere to it (after gessoing) and it's
not very buckled or heavy.
And the price is reasonable ($29 Canadian, or about $19 U.S. for a
four-by-eight-foot sheet.)
Gale Force
>(And sanding scores of wooden panels is not my idea of contenting my
>heart. It sounds tedious.) :-)
When I have had the occasion to use hardboard,
I've bought the full-size sheets, laid them
flat on the ground (concrete floor) and sanded
the entire sheet with a commercial sander using
the heaviest grit sandpaper I could find. It
goes quickly that way. I then cut the full sheet
to the sizes I needed for the art work. Sanding
smaller sizes is indeed not only tedious but
hard to do since you have to anchor the smaller
pieces to keep them from squirming around when
you run the sander.
Gale Force
says...
>First, you have to size the canvas with a rabbit-skin glue solution - one part
>rabbit skin powder to ten parts water.
You are so patient to explain all that.
I would simply have referred the readers
to Mayer's bible on the subject:
The Artist's Handbook, by Ralph Mayer.
You can find explanations there of not
only the traditional but also contemporary
methods of painting in various mediums.
Gale Force
>
>To me hardboard is a panel made of wood, you can still see the grain, just
like
>the group of seven used to paint on. Different terminology I guess.
>Dale
The terminology becomes important when
discussing subjects in a group forum
such as this. To avoid misunderstandings.
Hardwood is a general term used to differentiate
between the native trees - oak, maple, mahogany...
versus softwoods like pine, ash, and fir.
A wood panel, in art-reference terms, can mean
either the modern equivalent commonly referred
to as "plywood" or the older traditional wood
panels which are a solid wood board planed thin.
Some artists and galleries will list a painting
done on "hardboard (pressed wood/Masonite)" as
a "painting on board" without specifying what
type of board is used. Most often it is probably
the Masonite type.
As you know, I'm sure, the wood grain is visible
in both plywood and solid wood panels. Plywood
typically is manufactured in two grades: suited
to only interior use; or suitable for exterior
uses where it will be exposed to the weather -
such as is the case with plywood siding for homes.
Gale Force
>They had the same kind of smooth, primed, white hardboard I got at Home
>Hardware. It was labelled at this second store as "D grade" and
>"Standard Grade", which doesn't sound good.
Depending on where one lives and what's stocked
by the lumber suppliers in one's area, PLYWOOD
comes in various grades and forms, as you've
stated. In this region I can get plywood that is
already "sanded one side" - meaning it's going to
be more expensive than un-sanded plywood. The
"cabinet grade" plywoods typically used for
interior cabinetry is also free of knots or those
unsightly patches that the ordinary construction
grades contain - and is also the MOST expensive
in this region.
Gale Force
>so it wouldn't have
>to be sanded to get oil paint to adhere to it (after gessoing) and it's
>not very buckled or heavy.
I've not as yet commented on this "sanding after
gessoing." Some books advise to sand between coats
when using acrylic gesso. I never have. I do sand
off those little nubbins (defects) in the canvas
after a applying a couple of coats - but only if
the defect is obtrusive. I'd rather live with the
defect than weaken the weave by removing the
defect.
And I never have sanded the final coat before
painting on the hardboard or canvas that I've
primed with acrylic gesso. I usually control the
priming while I'm doing the priming, taking great
care with my final brush strokes as the primer
dries. I also use a large trowel for applying
primer to large surface areas but usually finish
off the surface with delicate last-minute brush
strokes in two directions that mimick the
weave of canvas.
NightMist
wrote:
>> I would either skip on a mirror finish, or look into oil
>> priming where you could put it on a roughed up board and then smooth
>> it to you hearts content.
>
>Oil-based gesso is at art stores?
I have never looked for it, but I expect somebody makes an oil based
gesso. I was more thinking of the the hide glue and whiting, or oil,
copal and zinc white that I have seen oil painters mix up themselves.
I imagine there are as many recipes for oil grounds as there are oil
painters through history.
>
>What kind of roughed up board do you recommend?
Whatever surface you are using, just scuff it up a bit with some
sandpaper.
>
>You're sure it's not good enough to sand acrylic-gessoed hardboard?
Sure you can do that. You just have to rough it up enough to insure a
reasonably good mechanical bond. When useing oils you just want avoid
an overly smooth ground, I think that is why canvas was embraced so
heartily as a painting support when oils became popular. Those little
dents and such in the surface make a pretty good mechanical bond with
the paint.
>
>I called Home Hardware and the manager of the lumber department said he
>has no idea if the hardboard is primed with acrylic or oil.
I would hazard to guess acrylic. I have seen commercial canvases that
specifically said they were oil primed, the same companies sell
canvases where the type of gesso is not specified, and I usually
assume that it is acrylic. It's the most common commercial ground.
>
>He also said all the hardboard is for interior use only.
Works for me.
>
>
Barbara
NightMist
wrote:
>
>I went to another store and was told they're out of stock of all MDF and
>I that I can't order any MDO there.
>
>They had the same kind of smooth, primed, white hardboard I got at Home
>Hardware. It was labelled at this second store as "D grade" and
>"Standard Grade", which doesn't sound good.
>
>What about one-quarter-inch oak plywood?
>
>It's smooth -- but not super smooth -- on one side, so it wouldn't have
>to be sanded to get oil paint to adhere to it (after gessoing) and it's
>not very buckled or heavy.
>
>And the price is reasonable ($29 Canadian, or about $19 U.S. for a
>four-by-eight-foot sheet.)
Sounds great to me, but I would check out the weight. You might find
it a bit heavy for larger pieces.
Personally, I adore wood panels. YMMV
Barbara
NightMist
wrote:
>I think the thinner paint film is at less
>> risk on a smooth surface than a thick one, but it will probably be
>> more prone to damage.
>
>A thinner paint film will probably be more prone to damage? I thought
>the thicker the paint film, the more likely the damage.
>
I did make that sound contradictory didn't I.
On a mirror smoth surface:
I think a thinner film is liable to be more delicate, more prone to
scratching and such.
I think the thicker paint won't be as prone to such damages, but is
likely to flake off the support before the thinner film.
Does that make what I am trying to say more understandable?
Maybe after I get my grants writing course, I will be able to
communicate more clearly. On the other paw, that might just make me
completely unintelligable to to average human! <G>
Barbara
Frank
> What about one-quarter-inch oak plywood?
>
> It's smooth -- but not super smooth -- on one side, so it wouldn't have
> to be sanded to get oil paint to adhere to it (after gessoing) and it's
> not very buckled or heavy.
>
> And the price is reasonable ($29 Canadian, or about $19 U.S. for a
> four-by-eight-foot sheet.)
Hi Tony,
Any hardwood is good, but of all the options oak is the least archival
choice because it has a very high lignin content, the "acid" in paper
fiber. Consequently it reacts with a variety of chemicals...ammonia
fumes will turn oak jet black. If you choose this I would pay
particular attention to priming.
Dik, if you read this...what do you mean by "door skin"? Are you
refering to thin Luan plywood that they make hollow core doors out of?
Dik F. Liu
verti...@hotmail.com (Frank) writes:
>Dik, if you read this...what do you mean by "door skin"? Are you refering to
thin Luan plywood that they make hollow core doors out of?<
Yes, that is it, the thin Luan plywood. I braced them in the back using 3/4"
plywood strip. For small size paintings, this construction is rigid and
lightweight, making the paintings easy to ship and to send to shows. For larger
paintings, I brace the corners with steel corner plates.
Dik
Dik F. Liu
writes:
>Thanks, Dik. Have you read Reed Kay's book on Studio Methods? It's excellent.
Reed is a Boston University prof here.<
I have heard about Reed Kay; but lack the chance to read his excellent book. I
know that he taught at BU. I don't know that he is still teaching.
>Someone may have mentioned this in this thread, but it's worth repeating
>for art newcomers:
>
>You can paint with either oil or acrylic over an acrylic ground (like
>acrylic gesso)
>
>You can only paint with oil over an oil-based ground.
>
>You can paint an underpainting (or anything else) in acrylic and then
>finish it off in oil, but you can't paint oil over acrylic (it will fall
>off).
>
>I remember this by remembering that you can paint in either oil or acrylic
>on a commercial canvas (they have an acrylic ground).
Great advice, Dan. Succinct yet thorough.
Dik
Dik F. Liu
writes:
>You are so patient to explain all that. I would simply have referred the
readers
to Mayer's bible on the subject:
The Artist's Handbook, by Ralph Mayer.<
Yes, the Ralph Mayer book. It is an excellent text, Gale; and I have its all
five editions. This book is indispensable for painters; and I referred to it
often. Yet when it comes to emulsion ground, for whatever reason Mayer's
instruction is incomplete. A while back I was speaking with an art store's
owner (also an art material enthusiast) who tried making this ground following
Mayer's instruction. She couldn't get the oil and the gesso to mix. I explained
to her that she needs to keep mixing the two AS THE GESSO IS COOLING. This
usually does the trick.
I usually store the extra gesso (the basic concoction, not the emulsion) in
small containers, and keep them in the freezer. I nuke them as I need them.
Dik
Tony Max
That's not feasible for me because if I take the whole four- by
eight-foot sheet home, I've got no saw to cut it accurately with. I'm
just painting in my dining room and don't have workshop facilities at
home.
Also, all that sanding indoors would be create a lot of fine dust which
which would be unhealthy to breathe. If I sand, I'll do it on the
balcony and then sweep the dust off of the balcony.
Tony Max
>
> In article <20010723224224...@nso-fh.aol.com>, dik...@aol.com
> says...
>
> >First, you have to size the canvas with a rabbit-skin glue solution - one part
> >rabbit skin powder to ten parts water.
I would rather not use painting substrates that require rabbits to be killed.
It's a bizzare contradiction of human nature that people say they love
animals and can become deeply depressed when their pet dog dies, but
they have no compuction about the fact that (over their lifetime)
hundreds of chickens, turkeys, cows and pigs are killed for their dining
pleasure and they wouldn't think twice about the fact that they're
causing rabbits to be killed so they can have a surface to paint on.
Out of sight, out of mind, I guess, is the only explanation.
Tony Max
> >At my hardware/lumber store the price of primed hardboard is the same as
> >the price of unprimed hardboard.
>
> *goggle*
> You can get primed board at your lumber store?!
> Ye gods the amount of time that would save me on the preliminaries!
But you wouldn't use it anyway because you wouldn't know if it's
tempered or not and you wouldn't know if it's oil-primed or
acrylic-primed, so I don't understand why you imply that you might buy
that if it were available in your area.
(I assume that tempering and priming are two different things.)
I went to Revy Hardware yesterday and a couple of the kinds of plywood
were labelled as oil-tempered, but the tempering was not listed for the
hardboard that seemed suitable in terms of weight and thickness.
Today I called Home Hardware and spoke with the owner. (The store is a
super-store covering several thousand square feet and with a lumber yard
and has millions of dollars in sales each year, I'm sure.)
The owner said he has no idea if the hardboard they sell is tempered or
untempered, and that it's been many years since anyone has asked him
that question, and that since he doesn't know the answer, I'd have a
hard time finding out from anyone in his lumber department -- or any
other hardware store.
He also said he doesn't know if the hardboard is oil- or latex-primed.
He recommended painting on birch so I'll check that out at the store
Tony Max
>
> Tony...
>
> I'm going to bed, and I am not getting up again, ever!
Instead of hiding, a constructive approach would be to learn as much as
you can about how you can protect yourself from toxins.
Then you can be confident because you know you are looking after your
health and are less likely to become sick or die of toxicity.
And then you can try to help others by teaching them about how they can
protect themselves from toxins.
Tony Max
> Regards....
>
> Tony Max wrote:
>
> > If it was sufficiently toxic to pose a threat, it would not
> > > be on the market long.
> >
> > You have been mislead into complacency. Aspartame is known to be highly
> > toxic, but it's legal. Silicone breast implants were legal for a long
> > time, as was asbestos in buldings and faulty wiring in MD-11 aircraft.
> > Household pesticides and herbicides are toxic. Carpets are hightly toxic
> > because they store toxins. Most shampoos are toxic because they contain
> > sodium laulel sulphate, which is known to cause cancer. The smog in
> > Vancouver is toxic and the provincial health minister announced that an
> > it is responsible for an estimated 8,000 annual hospital visits because
> > it gives people respiratory problems. My drinking water is toxic because
> > of the bacteria, lead, chlorine and other chemicals it it and so I
> > filter it. The U.S. Center for Disease Control estimated that 20,000
> > Americans die each year from properly prescribed drugs which are toxic
> > to the patients that take them and the doctors cause toxicity because
> > they push the toxic drugs. Cows' milk and meat are toxic because of the
> > hormones injected into the cows. Non-organic foods are toxic and some
> > imported, sprayed fruits and vegetables have been found to have toxins
> > hundreds of times above the allowable limit and the heads of the U.S.
> > and Canadian agricultural inspection agencies both said they boil their
> > fruits and vegetables because they are aware of the toxic pesticides and
> > herbides sprayed onto the food. Cellular phones are cancer-causing and a
> > phone manufacturer was recently found to be secretly researching cancer
> > shields for them. Many artists' materials are toxic and have cancer
> > warnings on them. Our local water is so toxic that on hot, summer days,
> > the government posts warnings at the beaches of the toxicity caused by
> > fecal coliform bacteria. And I could go on.
> >
> > Why do you think one in three Americans and Canadians die of cancer?
> > It's because we are surrounded by toxins and the toxins are absorbed
> > into our bodies.
Tony Max
I phoned the manufacturer (Canfor) of the hardboard today and the
customer service person told me that if the hardboard were tempered, it
would say so on the sticker that's on the back of the board. It doesn't
say "Tempered" on the back.
Also, he said that 99 percent of their hardboard that's primed is
acrylic-primed rather than oil-primed, because the acrylic is safer to apply.
So that implies to me that that particular particle board hardboard is
of the same quaility as the acrylic-primed hardboard available at art
supply stores, and that thinly-applied oil paint won't flake off of it.
Am I correct?
Tony Max
Dik F. Liu
<to...@design-write.com> writes:
>I would rather not use painting substrates that require rabbits to be killed.
It's a bizzare contradiction of human nature that people say they love animals
and can become deeply depressed when their pet dog dies, but they have no
compuction about the fact that (over their lifetime) hundreds of chickens,
turkeys, cows and pigs are killed for their dining pleasure and they wouldn't
think twice about the fact that they're causing rabbits to be killed so they
can have a surface to paint on.<
Well, you asked about oil based gesso, Tony, so I told you the recipe hoping
that that would benefit you. I am informing you of the recipe that artists
have used for eon. I didn't invent the recipe just to kill rabbits. I am not
that mean.
I am afraid that most traditional gesso recipes call for hide glue. If that
offend you, don't use it. It is the same hide glue used in many envelopes,
postage stamps, and Jell-O. So what are you going to do - castigate children
for enjoying strawberry Jell-O?
Dik
Tony Max
>
> In article <3B5E0F7F...@design-write.com>, Tony Max
> <to...@design-write.com> writes:
>
> >I would rather not use painting substrates that require rabbits to be killed.
>
> It's a bizzare contradiction of human nature that people say they love animals
> and can become deeply depressed when their pet dog dies, but they have no
> compuction about the fact that (over their lifetime) hundreds of chickens,
> turkeys, cows and pigs are killed for their dining pleasure and they wouldn't
> think twice about the fact that they're causing rabbits to be killed so they
> can have a surface to paint on.<
>
> Well, you asked about oil based gesso, Tony, so I told you the recipe hoping
> that that would benefit you. I am informing you of the recipe that artists
> have used for eon. I didn't invent the recipe just to kill rabbits. I am not
> that mean.
Thanks, Dik.
I know you didn't invent the recipe.
> I am afraid that most traditional gesso recipes call for hide glue. If that
> offend you, don't use it. It is the same hide glue used in many envelopes,
> postage stamps, and Jell-O. So what are you going to do - castigate children
> for enjoying strawberry Jell-O?
I try to buy products that don't require animals to be killed and I look
for alternatives.
I didn't know rabbit glue is used in Jell-o. It doesn't say that on the
packages. They must have changed the name of the ingredient to make it
sound more appetizing.
I would castigate parents who feed their kids a lot of Jell-o, because
it's not healthy, because it's loaded with refined sugar, which
temporarily raises insulin levels too high and lowers the effectiveness
of the immune system for hours.
Tony Max
It's even more complex than that. According to Grumbacher, you have to
wait for six months after applying the primer before it's safe to paint!
I got this information from the Grumbacher Web site in the discussion section.
"If you do choose to use an oil ground, please
be advised that proper use of such grounds include allowing the
ground/primer to age for at least 6 months after it is dry
to the touch. Failure to follow this rule can, and usually will, result
in traction fissures; that is, very deep horizontal cracks
developing in the painting in a couple of years after the painting is completed."
Dik F. Liu
<to...@design-write.com> writes:
> I didn't know rabbit glue is used in Jell-o. It doesn't say that on the
packages. They must have changed the name of the ingredient to make it sound
more appetizing.<
Read the ingredients in a Jell-O package, Tony, and you will see that gelatin
is listed as an ingredient. Gelatin is made from boiling the prepared skin,
bones, and connective tissue of animals.
This is why gelatin can be used as a substitute for bunny skin glue in
traditional gesso recipes.
Dik
Tony Max
> offend you, don't use it.
This thread is all about quality of art materials. Ethics is an aspect
of quality.
We have a right to be concerned about the quality of our art.
We also have a right to be ethical in our choice of art materials and
foods we eat.
Dik F. Liu
<to...@design-write.com> writes:
>It's even more complex than that. According to Grumbacher, you have to wait
for six months after applying the primer before it's safe to paint!
I got this information from the Grumbacher Web site in the discussion section.
"If you do choose to use an oil ground, please be advised that proper use of
such grounds include allowing the ground/primer to age for at least 6 months
after it is dry to the touch. <
Probably not a bad idea to wait six months, Tony. Better safe than sorry. But
an "oil ground" is completely different from an oil-based gesso. An oil ground
is lead white (titanium white these days) ground in oil. An old based gesso is
a traditional (hide glue/aqua based)) gesso saturated with a drying oil.
Dik
Dik F. Liu
eat.
Actually, you have a right to consider for YOURSELF what you think ethical in
your
choice of art materials.
That's because if you are truly ethical, you shouldn't whine that when you
soak your brushes in oil, the bristle bends. Where do you think bristle comes
come? And what faith do you propose for the hogs who are shaved of their
bristle just to serve your art?
Let them eat cake?
Dik
Gale Force
says...
>
>That's because if you are truly ethical, you shouldn't whine that when you
>soak your brushes in oil, the bristle bends. Where do you think bristle comes
>come? And what faith do you propose for the hogs who are shaved of their
>bristle just to serve your art?
Great retort Dik. Nothing gets my dander up
more than self-serving preachers who think
only the way they believe is the best for
everyone. And it's strange to me how many
people worry about "toxicity" and such in a
country where people are living longer than at
any time in history. If there's one single
answer to all of humankind's current woes,
it's a massive reduction in the number of
PEOPLE on this earth. I'll be leaving soon!
Gale Force
>That's not feasible for me because if I take the whole four- by
>eight-foot sheet home, I've got no saw to cut it accurately with. I'm
>just painting in my dining room and don't have workshop facilities at
>home.
Okay. Now I understand your plight.
You are a hobby artist and therefore
need only worry about those supplies
you can accomodate in an apartment.
I have been responding as if you were
a serious artist with a regular art
studio space. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Tony Max
>
> >We also have a right to be ethical in our choice of art materials and foods we
> eat.
>
> Actually, you have a right to consider for YOURSELF what you think ethical in
> your
> choice of art materials.
What I meant was that we are all free to discuss on this newsgroup what
we consider to be quality art materials and ethical art materials, since
this is a fine art newsgroup.
A variety of opinions have been expressed in this thread about the
methods and materials used for panels and canvasses, and each person has
contributed according to his or her own perspective.
I've done the same thing here regarding the ethics of the use of art
materials, and there's nothing wrong with that and it's not incosistent
with the fact that others in this thread have expressed ideas that some
of the readers might not have considered, and therefore might find useful.
> That's because if you are truly ethical, you shouldn't whine that when you
> soak your brushes in oil, the bristle bends. Where do you think bristle comes
> come? And what faith do you propose for the hogs who are shaved of their
> bristle just to serve your art?
>
> Let them eat cake?
>
> Dik
I use synthetic brushes.
Brushes and canvasses are different anyway, because properly cared-for
brushes can last for decades, whereas rabbit skin glue is used only once
in a canvas and the artist has to keep buying more glue, so the use of
hogs in brushes is more efficient (as long as the artist knows how to
care for the brushes so he or she doesn't have to replace them frequently.)
Gale Force
says...
>Yes, the Ralph Mayer book. It is an excellent text, Gale; and I have its all
>five editions. This book is indispensable for painters; and I referred to it
>often. Yet when it comes to emulsion ground, for whatever reason Mayer's
>instruction is incomplete.
Hmmmm! I guess no single reference can cover
all the variables, especially with something
as variable as artists and their materials.
I wonder though if the earlier editions of the
book might not be more focused on the older
methods (we call 'traditional') since the later
editions have turned their focus more toward
the latter-day mediums and methods??? I don't
own all five editions so I can't make a comparison
between editions 1 and 5.
Incidentally, Amazon.com carries another
excellent reference with the same title:
The Artist's Handbook, by Ray Smith.
Mayer's book is listed with it's subtitle
to avoid confusion between the two:
The Artist's Handbook of Material and Methods.
Capadocio
Let Tony be. It is impossible to counter arguments such as those
presented here re: killing rabbits to make glue. Such arguments, such
attitudes, cannot be effectively addressed because they arise more from
passion than from logic.
I know a woman with a host of the kinds of ideas that have marked Tony's
messages, regarding toxicity (I am amazed that the specie has survived.)
and now, the Right to Life of animals. She has a son who was been since
birth exposed to her cautions, her phobias and her fears, and today, at
14, he is a hopelessly confused mess.
Unfortunately, he also is my grandson.
Trust me. You cannot reason with Tony. Don't waste your time. Let the
thread get back to panels, supports in general, which has been a most
interesting journey.
Back to lurking....
(Gale... hang around a good while longer! You don't take up much space
at all.)
Tony Max
I am a serious artist. That doesn't mean I have to have every
conceivable piece of art equipment and supplies in my home studio.
I'm sure there are lots of professional painters who work at home who
don't have band saws and the tables to house them and don't want to
bother sanding four- by eight-foot sheets of wood with commercial sanders.
Instead, they buy their canvasses or panels elsewhere and hire someone
else to make odd-sized canvasses or panels for them.
I'll make an analogy with photography. Part of the work I do is
professional photography. That doesn't mean I need to install a darkroom
at home; I prefer to get my film developed and processed at a department
store and then scan the photos onto my computer and manipulate the
photos with a computer program and the quality is just as good as if I
had a darkroom at home (better, in fact, because darkroom work is very tricky.)
Another comparison is framing. Because framing is so specialized and
needs a lot of trainiing, time and equipment, I'd rather hire someone to
do it for me than to do it at home or rent a studio to do it in.
There's a strong attitude among serious artists that they have do
personally be involved in every aspect of their paintings -- some of
them even making their own grounds and gessoes!
To me this is inefficient and counter-productive because you can buy all
that stuff ready-made and doing it yourself doesn't necessarily give you
a better painting than if you got someone else to make the grounds,
gessoes, panels, canvasses and frames for you.
Tony Max
I thought of more good analogies.
The attitude that I have be personally involved of every technical
aspect of my work is like saying that a writer has to personally
assemble every book that he or she writes to have a quality book, or
that a musician has to go to the c.d. assembly plant to personally
assemble every c.d. that his or her songs are on to have quality songs.
I want to focus on the creative aspects of being an artist and not get
bogged down with the tedious, mechanical aspects.
The last two paintings I painted each took me about 130 hours, so I
don't want to waste time laboring over the mechanical aspects of the art.
Tony Max
>
> In article <20010725021914...@nso-dd.aol.com>, dik...@aol.com
> says...
> >
> >That's because if you are truly ethical, you shouldn't whine that when you
> >soak your brushes in oil, the bristle bends. Where do you think bristle comes
> >come? And what faith do you propose for the hogs who are shaved of their
> >bristle just to serve your art?
>
> Great retort Dik. Nothing gets my dander up
> more than self-serving preachers who think
> only the way they believe is the best for
> everyone.
Most of the letters in this thread are about artists explaining,
informing, advising (or 'preaching' if you will) about what they believe
to be the best supports for their paintings (often while criticizing
others' methods) so my comments about the use of animal products is no
different in that regard than anyone else's comments here.
The difference seems to be that people are more sensitive about the
animal issue than about substrates for paintings.
> And it's strange to me how many
> people worry about "toxicity" and such in a
> country where people are living longer than at
> any time in history.
Overall cancer rates in industrialized countries are also higher than
they were in the past when there were fewer artificial toxins in the environment.
The fact that people live longer doesn't mean that they couldn't live
even longer and healthier if there were fewer toxins in the environment.
I was born blind and as a result I've had three retinal detachments and
chronic glaucoma. The blindness may have been caused by a toxin that my
mother was exposed to. Why would I not want to prefer to have been born
healthy?
Your statement that people shouldn't be concerned about toxins is
absurd. If you get a chronic disease, you might change your tune.
Often, people only wake up about health issues when (like me) they have
chronic diseases.
If there's one single
> answer to all of humankind's current woes,
> it's a massive reduction in the number of
> PEOPLE on this earth.
That's true.
Tony Max
>
> Dik, Tony, and company -
>
> This may have been discussed in this thread (I haven't read all the posts)
> - what is the objection to using an acrylic ground (for canvas or wood) and
> waiting an hour for it to dry (or less), then painting in oil as usual?
That's a good question.
> I've done this many times and see no difference in the finished work.
Sounds good to me.
Thanks, Dik. I didn't know that.
Tony Max
Another analogy would be that a musician has to build all the
instruments that he uses to make his music with, in order to have
quality music.
The instuments are merely the vehicle and the song is that's important.
The canvas or panel is merely the vehicle and the image on the canvas or
panel is what's important.
Frank
>
> Another comparison is framing. Because framing is so specialized and
> needs a lot of trainiing, time and equipment, I'd rather hire someone to
> do it for me than to do it at home or rent a studio to do it in.
>
>
Tony,
I agree with you, but then again I am a professional framer in
addition to being an artist, and I wish more artists hired out.
Framing can be very expensive and I sometimes wonder if I would be a
sculptor if I didn't know how to frame my own work....
As to the "lack of seriousness" accusation fired at you...every artist
does what floats their boat, and no one way is more serious than
another. There are plenty of "hobby" artists that are extremely
serious about there work... One of the benefits of being a framer is
the amount of artwork I see every day... great, good, fair, bad,
awful...all of it. The one thing it all has in common is the
seriousness of the creator. No one is going to spend the money on
framing something if they don't feel it is worth it. The only
difference I see between professional artists and hobby artists is
that professional artists generally have less money to spend on
framing.
Tony Max
>
> Dik... Gale...
>
> Let Tony be. It is impossible to counter arguments such as those
> presented here re: killing rabbits to make glue. Such arguments, such
> attitudes, cannot be effectively addressed because they arise more from
> passion than from logic.
Excuse me; I am exremely logical. Logic is one of my specialties.
> I know a woman with a host of the kinds of ideas that have marked Tony's
> messages, regarding toxicity (I am amazed that the specie has survived.)
The species has survived because it is the most intelligent and
adaptable species on the planet. The fact the humans are the most
intelligent species on the planet has not, however, prevented human
ignorance and greed from fouling its own nest. This is an axiom and the
fact that you can't figure that out for yourself indicates that you're
not very bright.
> and now, the Right to Life of animals. She has a son who was been since
> birth exposed to her cautions, her phobias and her fears, and today, at
> 14, he is a hopelessly confused mess.
>
> Unfortunately, he also is my grandson.
I have not encouraged anyone to be phobic.
I have encouraged people to be educated, empower themselves and have
empathy, all of which are intelligent.
YOUR assumption that I am encouraging phobia is quite illogical, which
makes you a hypocrite.
Severely mentally handicapped people have comparable intelligence (or
less intelligence) than mammals such as rabbits, yet it would be
considered a travesty to cage those people, breed them and kill them to
make products.
This discrimination is based solely on the fact that one being is housed
in a human body while the other is housed in an animal body.
The fact that rabbits can't speak doesn't mean they have no
intelligence. They clearly show many of the same, basic emotions as
humans: curiosity, jealousy, anger, fear and pain.
As the dominant species on the planet, humans are obliged to look be
kind to lesser species.
> Trust me. You cannot reason with Tony.
I certainly can be reasoned with -- as long as I am presented with
reasonable arguments.
Tony Max
Marshall McLuhan was wrong; the medium is not the message. The medium
and the message are inextricably intertwined, but they are distinctly
different from one another and play different roles and it's the message
that's the more important part.
As Dr. McCoy would be apt to say, "I'm an artist, not a mechanic!"
Tony Max
>
> Dik... Gale...
>
> Let Tony be. It is impossible to counter arguments such as those
> presented here re: killing rabbits to make glue. Such arguments, such
> attitudes, cannot be effectively addressed because they arise more from
> passion than from logic.
>
> I know a woman with a host of the kinds of ideas that have marked Tony's
> messages, regarding toxicity (I am amazed that the specie has survived.)
> and now, the Right to Life of animals. She has a son who was been since
> birth exposed to her cautions, her phobias and her fears, and today, at
> 14, he is a hopelessly confused mess.
>
> Unfortunately, he also is my grandson.
>
> Trust me. You cannot reason with Tony. Don't waste your time.
This is another case of "Don't shoot the messenger." You may be reacting
negatively simply because you don't like the message.
It reminds of the passengers of the Titanic, who, upon being notified
that the ship is sinking, angirily cry, "What? This ship is unsinkable!
You're phobic!"
And let me add this, Dumkopf: It's much more likely you who will get a
terminal disease like cancer than me, because I've educated myself,
continue to educate and protect my health in dozens of ways every day,
instead of angrily denying the problem and the many means we have to
protect our personal health and safety.
I am also reminded of the famous saying, "There are no so blind as those
who will not see."
Tony Max
>
> For the reasons you cite, I never could understand that attitude on the
> part of some artists (usually amateurs). They have to grind their own
> paints, catch the bunnies and cook them down for the glue (grin) to feel
> right about their painting.
Right on.
Gale's accusation that I can't be a serious artist if I'm not willing to
use a band saw and commercial sander and sand four- by- eight foot
sheets of hardboard is total bullshit.
I know some financially successful artists and I'd be surprised if any
of them went to such lengths with many of the mechanical aspects of
their art proposed in this thread (making your own gesso, stretcher
bars, etcetera.) If they did they'd never get any painting art out the
door and money in the bank.
One such local, successful painter I know completes a painting every two
or three days, and he's incredibly talented and every piece of seen of
his is beautiful and unique. There's no way he could bother with all
that technical stuff and get any work done. He probably learned what
needs to be learned about the technical aspects of art and now can
concentrate on expressing his creativity.
Gale's advice reminds me of a photographer friend I had. He used to
carry around his fancy s.l.r. with various lenses and could spout off
all sorts of technical information about cameras and light meters and
gray cards and photography -- but his photos all looked like shit.
Gale Force
>To me this is inefficient and counter-productive because you can buy all
>that stuff ready-made and doing it yourself doesn't necessarily give you
>a better painting than if you got someone else to make the grounds,
>gessoes, panels, canvasses and frames for you.
You're absolutely correct - diversity of
views and in people is what makes life
so interesting. TO EACH HIS OWN! Far be
it from me to argue with someone but you
are the one who has kept this thread going
and going and going like that Pink Rabbit
with your incessant questions that seem (to me)
to be those of a novice.
Gale Force
verti...@hotmail.com says...
>As to the "lack of seriousness" accusation fired at you...
That wasn't meant as an "accusation" but as an
observation. This person has kept this thread
going with questions only a novice would ask,
IN MY OPINION. And that's all I've offered, is
my opinion. I have no authority here, only my
nearly 40 years of experience to go by.**
And like this poster, I spent far too much time in
my formative art years in trial and experiment
that I could have bypassed had I listened or
sought out someone with experience or knowledge.
>The only
>difference I see between professional artists and hobby artists is
>that professional artists generally have less money to spend on
>framing.
And that is YOUR opinion, informed by YOUR experience.
I'd like to offer an alternative explanation. Maybe
professional artists realize it's not the glitzy
or expensive frame that "makes" a painting - but
rather (in my case at least) detracts from the paintings.
I have long made my own frames - when I choose to frame.
Many artists today choose NOT to frame since it is
now perfectly acceptable, even in the most prestigious
galleries, to hang unframed works. And it is NOT
a lack of money in my case that keeps me from paying
a frame shop for something I prefer doing myself.
** I also just happen to have both a BFA and MFA
in Studio Art - but those were earned more recently.
NightMist
>Dik, Tony, and company -
>
>This may have been discussed in this thread (I haven't read all the posts)
>- what is the objection to using an acrylic ground (for canvas or wood) and
>waiting an hour for it to dry (or less), then painting in oil as usual?
>I've done this many times and see no difference in the finished work.
>
>
No objection whatever. Tony was talling about painting on a totally
smooth surface, and I was taught that this is a Bad Idea if you are
working in oils, unless you are working on an oil ground. Hence the
topic of oil grounds and gesso's came up.
Barbara
Gale Force
>Here is another way of looking at it: Painting is hard. It requires
>thought, effort, trying again, etc. If you concentrate on craft aspects
>such as grinding pigments, etc., you can feel like you're moving ahead
>without confronting a blank canvas.
And here is yet another way of looking at it.
Some of us (artists) are obsessively nit-picky,
or conscientious, or perfectionist. I know
PLENTY of artists for whom such nonsense is
either laughable, or totally against their
sloppy, laid-back, unconcerned or careless
natures. There just isn't a simple "frame"
you can put artists into when it comes to
explaining why we do what we do.
As for myself, I simply don't trust anyone
else to do as good a job as I can do myself -
UNLESS maybe they are themselves professionals
in what they do - framers, canvas stretchers,
conservationists or whatever.
Gale Force
>No objection whatever. Tony was talling about painting on a totally
>smooth surface, and I was taught that this is a Bad Idea if you are
>working in oils, unless you are working on an oil ground. Hence the
>topic of oil grounds and gesso's came up.
Something else that's being overlooked in these
discussions - acrylic gesso has a filler that
gives it 'tooth' in the dried state. I can see
no reason for doing anything further to a
surface that has been primed with at least two
coats of acrylic gesso. I never have sanded
before applying oil paints and I've been painting
in oils since before many of you here were born.
If MORE tooth than what the store-bought gesso
provides is needed, I would opt for adding another
filler - like marble dust or ground glass (both
commercially available) or glass beads for that
matter or even clean washed sand (available in
builder supply stores).
One needs to remember that ACRYLIC in ALL its
various forms is still basically one of the
best contemporary glues you can find. So adding
'stuff' to a painted surface and 'gluing' it down
with clear acrylic varnish (or gel) is perfectly
acceptable.
NightMist
wrote:
>Tony Max wrote:
>
>> >At my hardware/lumber store the price of primed hardboard is the same as
>> >the price of unprimed hardboard.
>>
>> *goggle*
>> You can get primed board at your lumber store?!
>> Ye gods the amount of time that would save me on the preliminaries!
>
>But you wouldn't use it anyway because you wouldn't know if it's
>tempered or not and you wouldn't know if it's oil-primed or
>acrylic-primed, so I don't understand why you imply that you might buy
>that if it were available in your area.
When I make a quilt, I prefer to use 100% cotton fabric for various
reasons. Sometimes the labeling on a fabric I want to use is
inadequate, but I use it anyway. If I am wrong about the fiber
content, the quilt top make shrink at different rates across it's
surface, according to the type of fabrics used. If this happens, I
don't die or anything, I just make a note to myself not to use that
particular source of fabric again.
Masonite is easier. Red streaked edge means it's tempered, green is
untempered, it is usually labled one way or another as well. If I am
not sure I ask questions. If the employees and management don't know,
I tend to shop elsewhere. So far as the priming goes, I would expect
it to be acrylic, and I would expect some sort of labling. I
certainly would not trust something from a lumber store to be artists
grade priming. Pre-primed from such a place however, would save me
buttloads of time so far as sealing the panel goes, I would only have
to seal one side and the edges. I expect I would still fuss with the
actual painting surface myself. Like I said, I have a tendancy to
fuss.
>
>(I assume that tempering and priming are two different things.)
Very much so.
In one of my recent mail order catalogs, Ampersand said that tempered
vs untempered is no longer a concern, because the oils in the
tempering process that were a problem for acrylic artists were no
longer being used.
Anybody have any more info on that?
Barbara
Gale Force
>Gale's accusation that I can't be a serious artist if I'm not willing to
>use a band saw and commercial sander and sand four- by- eight foot
>sheets of hardboard is total bullshit.
Everything you've written in this thread
to date points to your novice state of
mind, if not your actual amateur status.
I wasn't finding fault with you for that,
but YOU'VE chosen to make it an issue
and I therefore have to assume that I
hit a sensitive chord.
And I don't use a "band saw" for cutting
up 4X8 panels. Nor do I know anyone OTHER
than an uninformed novice who would even
suggest using a bandsaw for that purpose!!!
Tony Max
>
> In article <c31ee42a.01072...@posting.google.com>,
> verti...@hotmail.com says...
>
> >As to the "lack of seriousness" accusation fired at you...
>
> That wasn't meant as an "accusation" but as an
> observation. This person has kept this thread
> going with questions only a novice would ask,
> IN MY OPINION. And that's all I've offered, is
> my opinion. I have no authority here, only my
> nearly 40 years of experience to go by.**
> And like this poster, I spent far too much time in
> my formative art years in trial and experiment
> that I could have bypassed had I listened or
> sought out someone with experience or knowledge.
I am listening and seeking information from people with experience and
knowledge, but you're criticizing me for that by saying I 'm asking too
many questions, so you're contracting yourself.
And I have to ask a lot of questions partly because the truth is hard to
get at. There have been dozens of pieces of contradictory advice in this
thread alone. For example, a big deal was made about tempering, but now
Barbara said she read that tempering may no longer be an issue for
artists to be concerned about.
Tony Max
What's wrong with questions that seem to be those of a novice?
Dik F. Liu
<to...@design-write.com> writes:
>YOUR assumption that I am encouraging phobia is quite illogical, which makes
you a hypocrite.<
Unlike you, I don't pretend to understand logic. But I think that your
statement is what is called a non sequitur.
Dik
Dik F. Liu
writes:
>This may have been discussed in this thread (I haven't read all the posts)
what is the objection to using an acrylic ground (for canvas or wood) and
waiting an hour for it to dry (or less), then painting in oil as usual? I've
done this many times and see no difference in the finished work.<
There is nothing wrong with acrylic gesso. It is because acrylic gesso is so
convenient that traditional homemade gesso is almost obsolete today. The change
is understandable. Sadly, because of this change, making traditional gesso
according to the more obscure recipes has become a bit of a lost art.
The difference between the two gessoes isn't which is better. Rather, it is a
matter of how these grounds FEEL differently.
Traditional gesso, if made correctly, is the Rolls-Royce of grounds. It has a
silky smooth texture yet gives the brush a certain "bite"; and it absorbs
paints very differently from acrylic gesso. It is also more suited for glazing,
as the paints tend to dry flat on this ground. These qualities might not be for
you, and even if they are, might not worth your trouble.
By the way, for panel (wood) you needn't an oil emulsion ground. Just a basic
traditional gesso will do. And for that you needn't wait two months. Just a day
will suffice. I would recommend that if you are to use gesso on panels. For
every quart of cold gesso mix into it one egg yolk - that's unborn chicken yolk
for you animal right-to-lifers in this board.
Dik