Pigments to avoid
sarpedon
permanence of pigments.
http://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/waterfs.html
Although it is aimed at watercolorists, much of the pigment
information applies to all pigments.
It states that alizarin crimson, PR83, is a pigment to avoid because
it will lose its color very quickly, 15-20 years, so is not
professional quality.
Much the same is stated about hansa yellow, PY3, only marginally
lightfast.
the sarp
Cary Charles
"sarpedon" <the_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:59b1da2d.0409...@posting.google.com...
> There is a good site that analyzes the lightfastness, that is,
> permanence of pigments.
>
> http://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/waterfs.html
Hi,
Just to say a big thank you for posting that link. It makes very interesting
reading indeed!
Cary Charles
Contemporary artist - www.carycharles.com
sarpedon
you're welcome. I found his receipe for a "celestial blue" (phthalo
turqoise pluse ultramarine blue) quite intriguing, although since I
did not have phthalo turquoise around, I used a LeFranc and Bourgeois
Turquoise Blue with a Pebeo Ultramarine Blue and got a very good blue.
I am, right now, looking for good receipes for a green and a
red-violet.
the sarp
DNALJM
I recently omitted yellow ochre from my palette and it dramatically
solved problems like excessive yellowness and muddiness.
Cary Charles
> I found his receipe for a "celestial blue" (phthalo
> turqoise pluse ultramarine blue) quite intriguing, although since I
> did not have phthalo turquoise around, I used a LeFranc and Bourgeois
> Turquoise Blue with a Pebeo Ultramarine Blue and got a very good blue.
> I am, right now, looking for good receipes for a green and a
> red-violet.
Now mixing my own is a whole dimension I haven't explored, as yet - although
it has to be said that it is an attractive idea at times. My work tends to
need really creamy and smooth consistency though, so I would have to be
perfectionistic about it :o) The idea of creating my own blues etc. . . .
that is a a lovely thought. Toxicity must be something to keep an eye on, so
look after those lungs of yours.
Cary Charles
UK abstract / semi-abstract artist - www.carycharles.com
Cary Charles
news:20040909015916...@mb-m10.aol.com...
>
> I recently omitted yellow ochre from my palette and it dramatically
> solved problems like excessive yellowness and muddiness.
It is all a question of how and why you use the yellow ochre, I think. Mixed
directly into other colours it can go muddy as you say, but with my work I
mix it with white and really take the tonality up. In this way, it delivers
a fresh, natural feeling harmonious warmth that doesn't overpower. It serves
as a perfect contrast to pure colours, even other yellows, and as my work is
abstract and semi-abstract, this proves immensely useful at times. My
'Solar' painting is a good example of this in action (you can see it at
http://www.carycharles.com/0solar.htm)
Chris
> solved problems like excessive yellowness and muddiness.
Jane - what brand were you using? I find it is one that varies a whole lot
between makers, partly because some (like Talens Rembrandt) use synthetic
yellow ochre (it's very harsh) , while the natural pigments themselves seem
to vary somewhat, even from tube to tube from the same maker. I use the
Sennelier, and tend to whiten it with flake white, but otherwise I don't
usually mix it with other pigments.
Chris
Paul Mesken
Yes, there are huge differences between the yellow ochres of different
brands. Some are quite greenish, some quite orangeish. Consistency
differs as well. Most ochres (and other earths) are now made
artificially. I agree that they are often both too smooth and too
harsh. Natural ochre, as a pigment, is far coarser and has more "life"
in it. It can be made extremely lean (in that it resembles clay and
can be modelled with ease). When mulling the pigment it will be
completely obvious whether the ochre is natural or artificial. Any
pigment that is traditionally ground seems to be coarser and has more
life in it which makes it good for natural objects (like human
bodies).
Mixing skin colors with lead white (PW1, cremnitz, flake, blanc
d'argent, etc.) is always best IMO.
I find that "warming" ochres up with the slightest hint of a red oxide
like English Red (PR101) gives one the slight oranges one needs
(English Red is an extremely powerfull color so only a tiny bit is
needed). Full strength ochre appears to be greenish next to it (which
is good for the cool/warm thing).
Jane, with what did you replace your yellow ochre? I find buff
titanium (or "unbleached titanium") to be of some use as a base color
for skin tones.
DNALJM
>titanium (or "unbleached titanium") to be of some use as a base color
>for skin tones.
I didn't replace it at all, so the flesh is more prismatic. I use W&N
paints. My base color is cad yellow, red, and white. I guess the closest
aproximation for the y.o.-type areas is now cad yellow cooled off with terre
verte. A friend used cad orange neutralized with some bright lime green color
(that isn't in my paintbox) for a base, but it worked very well.
Paul Mesken
wrote:
>Paul Mesken <usu...@euronet.nl> wrote in message news:<hik0k0lnv4q83rqlt...@4ax.com>...
>> Mixing skin colors with lead white (PW1, cremnitz, flake, blanc
>> d'argent, etc.) is always best IMO.
>
>You don't use a lot of Dioxazine Purple mass-tone for skin color?
>lol. You're probably trying to match actual world skin colors. Oy!
I was talking solely of the white of choice for skin colors, _my_
choice (that's where the "IMO" stands for : "In My Opinion"). You can
extrapolate what you want, obviously you believe me to be some
photorealist.
You say you want harsh colors, then I say that Zinc White will work
best (or no white at all). You can choose to reject this technical
advice from me and go with Titanium White and choose to ignore the
resulting chalkiness.
You're becoming boring very fast, King. You're saying you respect
other people's views and don't try to change them but the contempt
shows through in your reactions. You might have more in common with
Mani then you might want to admit.
Paul Mesken
There's an amazing range of colors one can use as the "basic palette"
for skin colors. I tend to go for colors that have some "live" in
them. The cadmiums are okay, although I would find them too smooth to
have as a base. I find organics (like phtalo blue, irgazine red, etc.)
far too smooth, gives a plastic feel (I'd rather use such colors for
artificial objects). Many of the earths I find excellent because they
have a certain coarseness, a texture that I like for skin (and they're
also very cheap :-) However, a lot of manufacturers nowadays tend to
overgrind their colors which makes them very dense (very small
particle size).
One thing I like a lot about yellow ochre is that it quite
effortlessly can "flip" between greens and oranges so I can use this
color for the entire skin, both in cool and warm colors. It's a bit of
a workhorse :-)
King Rundzap
You keep wanting to argue with me now, too, lol. It's crushing my
smart-ass groove, but I'm pretty resilient. On the other hand, it's
right that I usually intend some kind of serious subtext to my
smart-ass comments, in this case, I'm reading most of the thread as
comments on how to get "natural" skin tones, so I'm throwing my hat in
the ring as someone who doesn't try to do that. I think it's
important to keep pointing out that different people try to do
different things.
Not everything I say is a serious attack on something. Maybe you use
dioxazine purple mass-tone for skin, I don't know. I've used it, at
least for some parts of skin, if you do stuff like that, too, cool.
Those kinds of things would be fun to talk about. I would guess
you're probably a realist, but not a photorealist, but maybe that's
not right. In either case, you probably wouldn't be using a lot of
purple, orange, sap green, etc. mass-tone for skin, but maybe I'm way
off-base there.
"You say you want harsh colors, then I say that Zinc White will work
best (or no white at all)" --mass-tone dioxazine purple would probably
have no white in it :-p
"You're becoming boring very fast, King." --am I trying to entertain
you? I'm trying to entertain me, I suppose, and succeeding so far.
"You're saying you respect other people's views and don't try to
change them but the contempt shows through in your reactions."
Did I actually type that somewhere? Maybe I did, but I don't remember
it--I'm guessing that you're more reading that in to my comments, but
it's not exactly what I mean. I can't imagine me saying that I'm not
trying to change anyone's views. I'm definitely interested in
combatting the ARC-oriented crowd's views. I'm more of a tit for tat
kinda-guy. So if someone is ragging on something that I don't think
deserves to be ragged on, I'll redirect the ragging towards them.
"You might have more in common with Mani then you might want to
admit."
Maybe . . . but what I'm bitching about is the narrow view of what art
is supposed to be about and if it's not about that, it automatically
sucks. I'm not bitching about other aspects of Mani's views--I've
actually pointed out a number of places where I agree with him. And
I'm also a huge Dali fan, I agree that the late 19th Century academic
painters got the short shrift, I think Mani's artwork is great, etc.
--King Rundzap
Electric Nachos
King Rundzap wrote in message
<425a3330.04091...@posting.google.com>...
>I think Mani's artwork is great, etc.
But what does that ***mean*** from a fellow who has no clear-cut "likes or
dislikes"? Lol
>--King Rundzap
King Rundzap
> On 10 Sep 2004 05:39:52 GMT, dna...@aol.com (DNALJM) wrote:
> >>Jane, with what did you replace your yellow ochre? I find buff
> >>titanium (or "unbleached titanium") to be of some use as a base color
> >>for skin tones.
> > I didn't replace it at all, so the flesh is more prismatic. I use W&N
> >paints. My base color is cad yellow, red, and white. I guess the closest
> >aproximation for the y.o.-type areas is now cad yellow cooled off with terre
> >verte. A friend used cad orange neutralized with some bright lime green color
> >(that isn't in my paintbox) for a base, but it worked very well.
> There's an amazing range of colors one can use as the "basic palette"
> for skin colors.
Yes--"all of them" :-)
>I tend to go for colors that have some "live" in
> them. The cadmiums are okay, although I would find them too smooth to
> have as a base. I find organics (like phtalo blue, irgazine red, etc.)
> far too smooth, gives a plastic feel (I'd rather use such colors for
> artificial objects).
Or--you could think of that Zappa classic, "Plastic People"
--King Rundzap
NightMist
>
>
> I recently omitted yellow ochre from my palette and it dramatically
>solved problems like excessive yellowness and muddiness.
I use yellow ochre in flesh tones.
I would be curious as to what you are useing instead.
In the course of things, I have found that yellow oxide does not do
well for me in flesh tones, but that raw sienna works marvelously
well.
Since going to acrylics, I have had to do some serious experimentaion
with color. My basic flesh palette in oils was yellow ochre, rose
madder, and ultramarine blue. In acrylic it has become yellow ochre,
quinocridone magenta, and anthroquinone blue.
Obviously I would have been looking for a substitute for rose madder
by now even if I could have stuck with oils, but I was surprised to be
unable to find an ultramarine blue I was happy with in acrylics. Many
of them tip a little too far violet for my happiness. Perhaps they
have gotten better, it has been a while since I've looked into them.
Barbara
--
"It's such a gamble when you get a face"
- Richard Hell
sarpedon
>
> Now mixing my own is a whole dimension I haven't explored, as yet - although
> it has to be said that it is an attractive idea at times. My work tends to
> need really creamy and smooth consistency though, so I would have to be
> perfectionistic about it :o) The idea of creating my own blues etc. . . .
Just in the last year I began discovering amazingly beautiful and
exotic readymade colors from the commercial manufacturers. of course
they are budget busters though. Just in the earth tones, there are
astounding colors like mars violet.
In the last few decades the conservators have been cleaning the old
master paintings using new methods and discovering that their color
schemes were brilliant and beautiful, not the dull yellow everybody
thought they were. The old masters, like Titian and Michelangelo,
were probably competing with their contemporaries to create the most
beautiful coloration to attract clients.
the sarp
sarpedon
If you look at the site i mentioned at the top of this thread, you
will find that the author has decided that colors in the rose madder
class are notoriously impermanent. This includes alizarine crimson.
He is speaking about watercolors, but I am using his advice for
acrylics, since the only differences would be the binding and
liquifying mediums. The author will put the word, AVOID, in capital
letters about the definite no-nos.
You might be able to tip ultramarine blue with an addition of a
small amount of phthalo blue or turquoise.
sarp
Paul Mesken
> The old masters, like Titian and Michelangelo,
>were probably competing with their contemporaries to create the most
>beautiful coloration to attract clients.
If only they could have had the plethora of colors we now have :-)
sarpedon
> I recently omitted yellow ochre from my palette and it dramatically
> solved problems like excessive yellowness and muddiness.
You keep on using yellow ochre, and that's an order. If you don't you
will have to go to bed with mani.
King Rundzap
But when did I say _that_? lol
You mean the fact that there isn't any art that I dislike isn't
clear-cut? I don't get that :-)
And remember all those times that I mentioned that there is art I like
better than other art. Oops, wait, I think I wrote those statements
in Martian.
--King Rundzap
Paul Mesken
>There is a good site that analyzes the lightfastness, that is,
>permanence of pigments.
>
>http://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/waterfs.html
Here is another :
http://www.erotic-surrealist-paintings.us/pigments_1.htm
http://www.sanders-studios.com/instruction/tutorials/historyanddefinitions/pigmentspresent.html
We also have Mayer, of course, and the Blockx list of "pigments to
avoid" (although that's a very old one).
I think it's interesting to see that the most lightfast pigments are
dominated by mineral pigments and the least lightfast pigments with
organic pigments (apart from the chrome, vermillion and aureolin).
However, all such tests should be taken with a grain of salt. There
are differences between manufacturers. There are also different
manufacturing processes that can make a pigment more or less permanent
(purity for example). Bruce's handprint site is definitely the most
exhaustive but it is only for watercolors. The oil medium might have
its effect on lightfastness (although I think we can safely assume
that his tests also have some significance for oil paints).
It becomes more complex in actual painting. Organic colors can fade
because of UV light (mineral colors decompose far less readily). But
there are also pigments that can absorb UV light and thus protect the
more sensitive organics (zinc white and the iron oxides for example).
So : mixing organics with zinc white is a good idea (zinc white is of
course and ideal mixing white) There's also varnishes that block UV
light.
Ultramarine might be lightfast but this is of little avail if it
starts to suffer from "ultramarine sickness" which turns it an opaque
grey (it's not completely sure why this happens, water might have
something to do with it or weak acids -> ultramarine is very sensitive
to acids). I believe smalt and azurite can suffer from this condition
as well but they are hardly used anymore.
Some pigments are believed to promote cracking in oil painting. The
umbers are one of them (mentioned by Blockx), ivory black as well
(mentioned by Mayer). This cracking happens when the a paint layer is
applied over the suspicious pigment. They might be lightfast but what
good will that do if the painting starts to crack.
Organic colors have a tendency to "bleed", this is not a thing of
impermanence but an annoyance anyway.
Lead white has for a long time been the only white in oil painting
(zinc and titanium white are relatively new). But it becomes more
transparent over time and might even start to reveal such things as
the sketch underneath. At least it is time tested. Titanium and zinc
white make brittle paint films. Lead white is far stronger. Perhaps a
mix of the three in different proportions (dependent on its use) is
the best way. Titanium white gives everlasting opaqueness (but can
make colors appear chalky), Lead white gives quick drying and a strong
and durable paint film (but becomes transparent over time) and zinc
white is a good mixing color for blues (being somewhat blue itself),
is the most transparent of the 3 whites and shields against fading by
UV light (but it is brittle).
There's a lot more to pigments, of course, which is especially
important when working in layers in oil painting (oil absorption,
paint film, drying rate, etc.) Even the shape and size of the pigment
particles are important (what kind of paint film they make, open or
closed).
I think we can safely say that the iron oxides (like ochres, siennas,
the mars colors, etc.) are very permanent, they are also very
inexpensive and good all around work horse pigments.
Cobalt blue (PB28) and Cerulean Blue (PB35 and PB36, which are also
cobalt blues) are blues of choice. Phtalo blue (PB15:xxx, but be aware
of its bleeding) as well.
The cadmiums, of course (PR108, PY35, PY37, PO20).
Manganese violet (PV16) and cobalt violet (PV14, PV49) score good on
the permanence as well.
Mars black (PBk11) is okay as well (being an iron oxide, Mayer says
"absolutely permanent") and ivory black (PBk9, as long as a pure film
is not overpainted by another layer).
For transparent strong colors, the DPP's will do (PR254, PR255, PO73).
Yellow seems to be somewhat problematic (I use Isoindoline yellow,
PY110 which is a very warm yellow, looks almost orange).
Paul Mesken
wrote:
>Cobalt blue (PB28) and Cerulean Blue (PB35 and PB36, which are also
>cobalt blues) are blues of choice. Phtalo blue (PB15:xxx, but be aware
>of its bleeding) as well.
I almost forgot! Manganese Blue (PB33), the most lovely blues of all
for skies. This blue is called "completely lightfast". Its undertone
is magical (its masstone that of cerulean and thus quite dull). It
works best in egg tempera or water color. The oil painter could use it
as egg tempera (which is a good and lean underpainting).
But it is hard to get nowadays because it is no longer made. For oil
painters : find the pigment instead of the paint. It's far better to
employ it in egg tempera (which can be used side by side with oil
painting). Beware of imitation. Old Holland still offers it as
pigment. Make sure of the ASTM pigment number, it is PB33. Colors
which are imitations (and still called "Manganese Blue") are often
made from phtalo blue (PB15:xx) and zinc white (PW4).
If you wonder what Manganese Blue looks like then look at the blue
skies on a sunny spring day (don't look straight up, the sky darkens
going up, it becomes more ultramarine). That beautifull, fragile,
"electric" blue is Manganese Blue. It's no longer made because it was
extremely polluting to manufacture. Only a completely smooth
(traditional) gesso panel and the medium of egg tempera can bring out
that specific blue.
King Rundzap
> There is a good site that analyzes the lightfastness, that is,
> permanence of pigments.
>
> http://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/waterfs.html
Oops--just tried to post this, and Google gave me a server error
message. Well, here it is recreated. Maybe you'll get a first and
second draft.
The lightfastness info is valuable on that site, but I just read
through a lot of the other material--the color theory stuff--and boy
is it wacky! Not only is it basically nonsense--an attempt to codify
subjective preferences into objective laws (I, for one, preferred the
"red-shifted" Gaugin example to the original work), but the author
makes logorrhea look terse. It brought back nightmares of my freshman
music harmony and voiceleading class. Yikes! :-)
--King Rundzap