Qsilv

http://www.tucsonaz.gov/arthazards/paint1.html

five

Mayer! that's who I meant when I said Meyer (suspect the same for Chelydra). How quickly we forget. Thanks, Q.

I liked painting on raw (unprimed) canvases (okay, I did put a thin layer of pva or rabbit skin glue to size the canvas) even if it is not necessarily a best practice... the fabric really soaks in the paint (see Helen Frankenhaler -sp?) like a sponge. First, however, this uses a lot of paint very, very quickly, which is expensive. Second, as I recall, the paint and/or solvents in the mediums can eat through the linen/cotton fibers (eroding them), there's no film barrier between the support (the linen) and the paint film, and the painting is harder to conserve. (All paintings are tricky to some degree to conserve/repair, despite the fact that some have lasted for hundreds of years.) I don't think the rabbit skin glue/pva is enough to stop this, though Chelydra can correct me if he has found/know otherwise. My memory is short on this (I did take an art conservation class many years ago) Best to prime, IMHO.

As random tidbit I learned from a painting instructor... if you roll a painted canvas, roll it with the image facing outward not inward (something to do with how the paint film contracts when rolled inward).

When I was painting, I generally did not stretch my own canvases. I did learn how using both staples and tacks. I like copper tacks (applied with a magnetic hammer) best but probably because I used a hand stapler and it really hurt my hands; if I had an electronic staple gun, I might feel differently. I could never pull tight enough with the stretcher pliers (the tool for stretching canvas) and the canvases I stretched ended up way too loose. I paid someone to do make stretcher bars and stretch the canvas for me.

Among the advantages of stretching the canvas yourself or having it done custom for you is that there is enough extra canvas that if you have to take it off the stretcher frame you have enough to re-stretch (admittedly re-stretching painted canvases presents conservation issues).

If you use store bought canvases, use the ones on thick stretcher bars and on which the canvas wraps all around with staples on the back and Gesso them; do not rely on claims that the surface has been gessoed by the manufacturer.

I've also painted on unstretched canvas. Should not stretch these afterward, as it's likely to crack the paint films. Ends up being hung from grommets (see, e.g. Leon Golub)

One last random tidbit... There is a how to book from a Renaissance era artist -- I honestly forget who -- that sets out how different paints were made. It's fascinating actually to read how they derived their pigments and from what. Maybe Chelyra or Q or someone else can supply the name.

five

http://www.acminet.org/CPListSearch.html (safety certification by a non-profit organization... website currently being updated but they have a printable list of certified products

five

Interesting, the Arizona list posted by Q, there was not an issue with graphite. I'm skeptical as in its powdered form it's dust like pastels (more so because there is no binder), and is inhaled. (A fair bit; it gets over everything! I swear it manages to move around the room.) Same for powdered charcoal. Perhaps they were only looking at graphite in the form it is in pencils, for which I see little issue, though I would not suck on the graphite end of a pencil. This is one of the potential pitfalls with the health/safety lists ... there may not be information on risks associated with all kinds of use. Also, for some though not all materials, the risks are associated with dose (e.g. cumulative exposure).

mum23

Thanks Q and five for responding to my question about toxicity information. I looked at both, but they didn’t match the pigments numbers that I had, so I’ve just been looking further…. and found this:

http://www.artiscreation.com/ColorCharts.html
Here, you can find the products made by each manufacturer by clicking on the product you want to know about. This brings up the manufacturers’ charts showing the pigments used for each colour. They use the colour index international numbers which you can then look up here ….

http://www.artiscreation.com/Color_index_names.html If you click on any pigment, you get lots of information about it and a rating from A to C++ for toxicity, with A being ‘safe’ etc. There are also clickable MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets) for many of the pigments, although not all of these work.

The rest of that site looks like it could be interesting too:
http://www.artiscreation.com/Color%20of%20Art.html
There’s a wealth of information there…I’ll be going back sometime when I’m not half asleep!

Agreed, five, about the aspect of cumulative exposure not necessarily being taken into account in the safety sheets, and the dust alone being an issue. I’m wondering if it is a big enough concern to stop using pastels, given that working outside is not an option, and I can’t set up filter systems etc… It’s hard to know what the dangers really are if you take reasonable precautions. Discussions on WetCanvas (another excellent resource for visual artists of all sorts) could sway you either way too…

Thanks for all the other amazing info you’re putting up here five. This is going to be a brilliant resource…

five

Excellent site, mum23. The links within the site to the MDS are very helpful, as some of these give information on prolonged exposure, etc. where its available. I meant to say in my earlier post that toxicity judgments on the safety sheets are based on judgments about "safe" levels of exposure, the safe level differing depending on the material and some materials being declared not safe on any exposure. The form of exposure (ingestion, inhalation, skin absorption) sometimes increases or decreases the risk) as does the duration. It's dose-response related, and again, in some cases, any dose is considered problematic. Cumulative exposure increases your level of exposure (dose) though it may still be below what is considered a "safe" level.

Plenty of artists take precautions and decide to take the risk (I did when I was using dry pigments, which I often used indoors, btw, without fancy filter systems; I got a respirator, I was careful about what pigments I would use, and I sprayed fixative outside). I'd recommend keeping to a room that the kids are not allowed in and open windows for ventilation.

I'd also try to find another medium that gives you satisfaction. Try oil sticks/bars; they can be quite juicy. I think you might end up liking them. Oil sticks are thicker and more buttery than "oil pastels" -- less wax, I assume; I don't like oil pastels much as I find them dull to work with.

Qsilv

Pastel artists

ok... this discussion got me wondering just how dangerous the pastel medium really is. At a personal level, I've had several friends and family who've died too damned soon, from a variety of causes including cancer. I've got a science background, so I'm familiar with the strengths and weaknesses in the ways toxicity is assessed, mutagenics, LD50 ...all that. BUT... the old joke about "average" is that it's a line running among a bunch of dots that never actually touches any of 'em. So, stating my own bias clearly, I freely admit I'm more a rough'n'ready type. YMMV. (Your mileage may vary.)

Anyway, I got to wondering (this is all your fault, Mum & five... and it's a good thing I don't need more'n 5 hours or so sleep for a few nights running... ppthththhh!) about artists who really spent their lives working with pastels (and generally oils too, plus often other materials)... how long did THEY live... what problems did they seem to have... and what did they die of?

The following summaries are all quickly grabbed from Wikipedia and cursorily edited to fit my purpose... oh maaannn, are these folks worth reading MORE about! ...and of course it could be argued that we don't hear about the ones who died young. Still.... here are some noteworthy "dots" in the swath of "average"---


Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin (2 November 1699 – 6 December 1779) ...born in Paris, the son of a cabinetmaker, and rarely left the city.. lived on the Left Bank near Saint-Sulpice until 1757, when Louis XV granted him a studio and living quarters in the Louvre. In 1765 he was unanimously elected associate member of the Académie des Sciences, Belles-Lettres et Arts of Rouen, but there is no evidence that he left Paris to accept the honor... Largely self-taught [which suggests to me that he didn't spend much time in other artists' workspaces, around their chemicals, just his own]... Chardin's subjects of choice were viewed as minor categories... simple yet beautifully textured still lifes, and sensitively handled domestic interiors and genre paintings... common household items... and an uncanny ability to portray children's innocence in an unsentimental manner... found an appreciative audience in his time, and account for his timeless appeal. [He did lose his first wife and two daughters to early deaths, plus a son committed suicide.] Chardin worked very slowly and he only painted slightly more than 200 pictures (about four a year) total... [he used pastel studies for his oil paintings]. In the 1770s his eyesight weakened and he took to painting in pastels. Died age 80.


Rosalba Carriera (October 7, 1675 – April 15, 1757) ...as a child, she began her artistic career by making lace-patterns for her mother, who was engaged in that trade. As snuff-taking became popular, Carriera began painting miniatures for the lids of snuff-boxes, and was the first painter to use ivory for this purpose. Gradually, this work evolved into portrait-painting, for which she pioneered the exclusive use of pastel. ...hugely popular and in great demand (and, in effect, the wage-earner of her family)... Carriera had an unusual ability to represent textures and patterns, faithfully re-creating fabrics, gold braid, lace, furs, jewels, hair and skin and show-casing the sumptuous, material life-style of her rich and influential patrons. ...her sight, which might have been damaged by miniature-painting in her youth, deserted her... she went blind... (but) She had outlived all her family... was in effect their wage-earner.... painted Watteau, all the royalty and nobility from the King and Regent downwards, and was elected a member of the Academy by acclamation. [Died age 82].


Maurice Quentin de La Tour (September 5, 1704 – February 17, 1788) was a French Rococo portraitist who worked primarily with pastels. Among his most famous subjects were Voltaire, Rousseau, Louis XV and Madame de Pompadour. He was made portraitist to the king in 1750 and held this position until 1773, when he suffered a nervous breakdown. La Tour founded an art school and became a philanthropist before being confined to his home because of mental illness. He retired at the age of 80 to Saint-Quentin and died at the age of 83.

Edgar Degas (1834–1917) ...famous for his work in painting, sculpture, printmaking and drawing. His mother died when Degas was thirteen. In 1873 his father died, and ...dependent for the first time in his life on sales of his artwork for income, he produced much of his greatest work during the [ensuing] decade. ... he mocked [other landscape painters] for painting outdoors.... By the later 1870s Degas had mastered not only the traditional medium of oil on canvas, but pastel as well. The dry medium, which he applied in complex layers and textures, enabled him more easily to reconcile his facility for line with a growing interest in expressive color. In the mid-1870s he also returned to the medium of etching, which he had neglected for ten years... [again with the chemicals... acid baths] ...In the late 1880s, Degas also developed a passion for photography... photograph[ing] many of his friends, often by lamplight... [note that this involved interesting chemicals and one didn't just run the negs down to the corner store for development...] As the years passed, Degas became isolated, due in part to his ... argumentative nature... Although he is known to have been working in pastel as late as the end of 1907, and is believed to have continued making sculpture as late as 1910, he apparently ceased working in 1912, when the impending demolition of his longtime residence... never married and spent the last years of his life, nearly blind, restlessly wandering the streets of Paris before dying in September 1917 [age 83]


Mary Cassatt (May 22, 1844 – June 14, 1926) ...one of seven children, of which two died in infancy... Cassatt grew up in an environment that viewed travel as integral to education; she spent 5 years in Europe and visited many of the capitals, including London, Paris, and Berlin... learned German and French and had her first lessons in drawing and music... began studying painting at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts in Philadelphia at the early age of 15 ...[however] female students could not use live models (until somewhat later) and the principal training was primarily drawing from casts. Impatient with the slow pace of instruction and the patronizing attitude of the male students and teachers, she decided to study the old masters on her own... [studied with certain painters in their studios ...eventually settling in Paris] Her sister suffered from recurrent bouts of illness, [dying] in 1882 ... [under Degas's influence] she became extremely proficient in the use of pastels, eventually creating many of her most important works in this medium. Degas also introduced her to etching,... [and she was a frequent exhibitor in the Salons, especially Impressionist]... After 1886, Cassatt no longer identified herself with any art movement and experimented with a variety of techniques.... The 1890s were Cassatt's busiest and most creative time. She had matured considerably and became more diplomatic and less blunt in her opinions. She also became a role model for young American artists who sought her advice. she continued to be very productive in the years leading up to 1910....but she was no longer breaking new ground, and her Impressionist colleagues who once provided stimulation and criticism were dying off. Diagnosed with diabetes, rheumatism, neuralgia, and cataracts in 1911, she did not slow down, but after 1914 she was forced to stop painting as she became almost blind. Nonetheless, she took up the cause of women's suffrage, and in 1915, she showed eighteen works in an exhibition supporting the movement... She died on June 14, 1926 [age 82]


James Abbott McNeill Whistler (July 10, 1834 — July 17, 1903) ...His famous signature for his paintings was in the shape of a stylized butterfly possessing a long stinger for a tail.[1] The symbol was apt, for it combined both aspects of his personality—his art was characterized by a subtle delicacy, while his public persona was combative. ...Young Whistler was a moody child prone to fits of temper and insolence, who—after bouts of ill-health—often drifted into periods of laziness. His parents discovered in his early youth that drawing often settled him down and helped focus his attention.... His father, however, died from cholera at the age of forty-nine... Whistler turned down his mother's suggestions for other more practical careers [wickedly funny bouts at a religious school and --of all places! West Point!] ....[went to Paris, where] his poor health, made worse by excessive smoking and drinking, laid him low. [He recovered...] ...ongoing work pattern, especially with portraits: a quick start, major adjustments, a period of neglect, then a final flurry to the finish.... in 1860, he produced another set of etchings ...beginning to establish his technique of tonal harmony based on a limited, pre-determined palette. ....In January 1864, Whistler's very religious and very proper mother arrived in London, upsetting her son's bohemian existence and temporarily exacerbating family tensions. As he wrote to Henri Fantin-Latour, "General upheaval!! I had to empty my house and purify it from cellar to eaves." He also immediately moved [his mistress] to another location.... His usual wit, enchanted.. with verbal flourishes such as "the artist's only positive virtue is idleness—and there are so few who are gifted at it." ...friends reported, on the contrary, that Whistler rose early and put in a full day of effort... During [a 14 month] exceptionally productive period, Whistler finished over fifty etchings, several nocturnes, some watercolors, and over 100 pastels—illustrating both the moods of Venice and its fine architectural details... He was at the top of his career when it was discovered that [his wife] had cancer... He made drawings on lithographic transfer paper...as he sat with her. She died a few months later. In the final seven years of his life, Whistler did some minimalist seascapes in watercolor and a final self-portrait in oil... corresponded with his many friends and colleagues... founded an art school ... died in London on July 17, 1903 [age 69]

Modern notable artists who have worked extensively in pastels include--
Wolf Kahn [b. 1927... still alive aged 83]
Fernando Botero [b. 1932... still alive aged 79]
R. B. Kitaj [b. 1932... died 2007 just before his 75th b'day... suicide]
Daniel Greene [b 1934... still alive aged 77]
Francesco Clemente [b. 1952... still alive aged 59]

chelydra

I have a digital story for you, to show why I wanted to get this discussion going. I've spent months getting the CD job perfect, and I was planning to wrap it up tonight, and then got apprehensive and double-checked some stuff with internet research and an InDesign "pre-flight" and "package" process. It was only now that I realized the pictures I'd been assembling and manipulating and filtering and feathering were almost all RGB jpegs, when they should have been only CMYK tiffs. That means almost all the twenty pages of the CD booklet would possibly have printed as pure pixelpuke - a soup of stray squares of random colors, barely recognizable as pictures let alone the digital gems I've been polishing and fondling. So now I may have to start all over again from scratch. I see now why people pay lots of money for seminars and sources in using Adobe programs. At least there no toxic dust coming off the computer screen, so I suppose I should count my blessings. But now I really really miss brushes and pigments and ink.

chelydra

A few postscripts and replies...
I should have clarified when I said I hate charcoal and pastel, that it's only my aversion to using dry dusty media (toxic or not) I meant. I really love the way pastels look, at least I do when the colors are alive and compositions are bold.
Also, what I wrote earlier looks like a plug for Winsor Newton paints, but the plug is only for those specific colors and brushes I mentioned, not for WN as a brand in general.
In 1978, and again in 2002, I took a spare masonite panel (gessoed) and squeezed out little samples of every color I had accumulated, and wrote little notes next to each sample - the exact color name and brand & grade of paint. I smeared each of them a little to see how very thin glazes would look, and left little mounds of heavy impasto too. The original idea was just to see the color variations sold under the same name by different manufacturer, and see the differences in composition/texture/vividness. But as the paint dried and the panels sat around my studio, they began to serve a whole other purpose - to show how different brands of paint stand up over time. Winsor Newton flunked disgracefully; many of the samples (including that artist-grade WN cadmium yellow medium I had fallen in love with back in 1960) ended up shriveled and wrinkled and blackish! Blockx (of which I had a ton since a shop went out of business and their stock was sold off at 95 cents a tube) held up the best, still looking fresh-squeezed many years later. The results were about the same from both the 1978 and 2002 experiments. Incidentally, this is a good example of you (and I) shouldn't take my opinions too seriously; I mentioned my prejudice against poppyseed oil, but that's what Blockx uses for all its pigments, not just whites. I think WN uses mostly linseed. Grumbacher uses only linseed, though, and their samples held up generally a little better than WN (although actually I think I just had their flake white). Oddly, there were a couple of notoriously fugitive colors among my samples, which even their manufacturers warn you not to use, and they look absolutely fine after all these years!
Five mentioned Old Holland paints, which reminded me of a conversation about fish with my sister a couple of days ago. She's a veggie, but occasionally she has to buy fish for our ancient mom's suppers, and the fish counter grosses her out. I am not a veggie and there's nothing I like better than the freshest wildest fish (bluefish on Long Island, wild salmon in Nova Scotia once) cooked slowly over an open fire. There's nothing more dismaying than seeing a fish display where the eyes have caved in and the scales no longer glisten and the smells are stale. Or so I thought! Then in New York's Chinatown I saw fish for sale that were still gasping for air and writhing around. And there are places in London (Morrisons supermarket, and some stalls at local markets) where the fish, although perfectly still and quiet, are so fresh they look like they're looking back at you. This is too much for me, and I go buy a frozen pizza or something instead. What does that have to do with Old Holland oil paint? It's the same thing, only in a different medium. I thought there was nothing I hated more (besides unfresh fish) than cheap, weak student-grade oil paints. But then I tried Old Holland - the Rolls-Royce (or Ferrari) of oil paints. I have the same reaction as to the alive-looking fish displays. I know I should be overjoyed, I know it's the paint I always dreamed of (just as those ultra-fresh fish are the fish I always dreamed of). But I hate it, it's way "too much of a muchness" as my grandmother used to say. If you squeeze out a tiny dab of Old Holland blue onto a palette with other (normal) paint, soon your whole world turns blue. And the colors all seem very weird to me; even their names are peculiar. I don't trust them, just as I don't trust the alive-looking fish, and I would never buy another tube of the stuff.
Blockx by the way is very buttery, so buttery it seems decadent. I think Salvador Dali swore by Blockx — and that almost slimy, slightly repulsive perfection of his canvasses says it all. But I find I do like using it, especially for portraits. The other brands among my samples fell somewhere between WN and Blockx in terms of durability. Those two were the big surprises (one bad, one good).
As for the original purpose of the test - to judge color variations between brands - Blockx's burnt sienna is remarkably dull and uninteresting for some reason. Some of the other samples from highly reputable manufactures, like Harding's Indian yellow, were quite dull in hue also. I still prefer WN for burnt sienna, Indian yellow, and sap green (it was WN's cadmium yellows that had deteriorated most alarmingly).

One prejudice I'm sure I'm right about is cotton versus linen. I was not exaggerating when I said I could tell the difference fifty feet away at outdoor art shows. Cotton is deadly for colors. Linen resonates. It's the difference between the gong of a fine bronze bell and one made of tin or aluminum. One sound carries through space, musically; the other is flat and lifeless.

chelydra

So, Qsilv, what's your conclusion from your research? Do toxic art materials serve (like formaldehyde) as some kind of preservative, keeping artists more or less alive to advanced ages, but at the same time sending them into blindness or madness? From what I've read, mercury (and maybe lead too) can destroy lives without actually ending lives. Their terrible effects are not necessarily fatal.

five

But linen (vs cotton) isn't like the fish?

You are much more a painter than I, and I love your descriptions. I still love Old Holland paints (but won't pay for them for under layers or for thick painting-- way to pricey). I never used Blockx.

On the digital, I am convinced you are being pickier than most artists would be. Can't you convert your file to CMYK and tweak from there?

Qsilv

I prolly need to re-read this stuff before opening my mouth.... but here's the short version--
yes you can easily convert from RGB to CMYK... BUT... the problem isn't with the conversion... it's with the way those basic inks combine.

Best way around it is to use custom mixed "spot" inks (and varnishes).

You need to figure out which color standard you're using... Pantone... ICC... etc.

So... if you're going to have your file printed like with real ink on real paper, you HAVE to check with your printer (human, not machine) to see what s/he WANTS. In fact it's always most efficient to make that your FIRST step, even before drawing much of anything.


Moral of the story: as a commercial artist, you can argue with and exert a lot of control over your client, but your (human) printer is God.

Qsilv

oh... and on the other.... no conclusion at all. Yet.
(I'll get to it... eventually) ;>

Really, it's too small a sample and I don't have enough time to plow through the 3000+ artists I do have dates for, and there's no real obvious chart on the net... tho there's an interesting study comparing artists to popes....

five

I am not a commercial artist... (thankfully, would not have the patience for it). I do make fine art digital prints from time to time. When I do, I run (or have run) test prints and tweak based on the test prints. No doubt I could be more efficient from the get go.

Also question for those in the know ... what's the best way to size up my files. Hate to sound ignorant, but I suppose I am. I shoot raw files -- they start as 240 dpi (why that's smaller than the fine JPG files which are 300 dpi at capture I don't get). I'd like to size up so I can print larger that 12" x 16" (which seems to be the maximum size I can get from my files and even that is often a push). I don't do that much to the files post capture, but I do mask and fix the levels (I don't always have the right lighting when I shoot and for somethings I like to shoot mostly in the dark with light strategically used to highlight) and I adjust saturation somewhat.

chelydra

Q: Now you GOTTA tell us about: artists + popes = ?
5: The best way to upsize file is to not do it at all ever, but I have found if I plan to do a lot of messing around with a pictures, it's good to double the size first, which I think might make it less likely to break down under the stress. The basic concept is information, which can only enter in through the original pixel arrangement. To quadruple the number of pixels with no fresh information coming in just gives you meaningless pixellation, like adding another 15,000 pages to the Encyclopedia Britannica and then filling them with random letters (alphabets without information). But IF you're going to do a whole lot of photoshop 'filtering' as you boost a file up to fill 18 x 24 poster, then I think the answer is yes, do it... Just go photoshop 'file size' and make it as many dpi's as you want, or rather it might be better to type in the dimensions of the poster instead so you're not enlarging it later to fit. The photoshopping supplies the 'information' in the form of special effects, so the final work won't look 'blown'up'.... Of course, the very best result might come from just creating a huge, impressive, elegant matte around the picture (you can get quite fancy and very subtle by changing background colors as you boost up the 'canvas size' in stages - like maybe first a thinnish black line adjacent to the picture, then a big chunky mass of blood-red two inches wide all around it, then add a spiderweb-thin hairline of golden-orange... then add whatever else you want... and then your picture will be sitting pretty in the middle of all that, its original pixels still intact, and all of its 'information' telling its original truth...

chelydra

And as you presumably already know, don't do ANY kind of changes to a jpeg file; save it as a tiff first. Jpegs are prone to break apart under any stress at all. Tiff, photoshop's own format, are more rugged. You can turn it back into a jpeg later when it's in its final form.

mum23

chelydra, I hope there is some way for you to salvage all that work... my commiserations! Hindsight, as they say...

I'm with five... I love reading your descriptions... makes me wish I could have another twenty lifetimes to try it all out... and no, I'm not talking about the fish! I'm curious... Do you have any theories on why the cotton produces lifeless paintings? I haven't read this anywhere before.

Q.... artists and popes?? Do tell!

I've been reading further on the pastel artists/death thing and also haven't come to any conclusions, except that for some reason they all end up doing it! And, who wants to live to a ripe old age if one is blind, mad or worse?

When I first started, the first two books I read were by pastel artists who died early from cancer... one was Dennis Frost and I don't remember the other's name. I'm also from a science background, and have always avoided chemicals ('most everything in our house is cleaned with bi-carb or vinegar) so on that highly representative sample of two I decided to make sure that I bought non-toxic pastels.

Interestingly, though, I read an entry from Kitty Wallis who said that after 20 years of mixing pigments (incl. cadmium, cobalt etc), taking no precautions and often being enveloped in clouds of pigment dust she had herself tested for heavy metals... surprisingly there was nothing untoward in the results except arsenic, which was attributed to drinking water as a child... so who knows? All the artists you managed to dig up lived to good ages. Personally, I'll just avoid the known nasties and play as safely as I can with the rest.

Another question... chelydra's comments about the fugitive colours made me wonder again why manufacturers produce and sell paints that they know are going to fade. 100 or so years down the track you might expect some changes, but for the colours which aren't considered lightfast the time frames seem to be much shorter than that.

five

I am about to make up data to make a point...but gist is right. Perhaps 1 in 10 cancer victims have painted, 1 out 10 painters get cancer. The numbers are no doubt near this. Like I said, made up data; substitute smoking, etc. here, and its the same point. It depends on the direction you look. But if you compare your risk with exposure and without exposure and the risk is significantly enough higher, good health wise to avoid if you can. And yes, who wants to go blind and mad. BTW, these painters probably had plenty of other exposures - industrial pollution, lead in the paint of buildings, and so on.

Thanks for the tips, Chelydra.

Mum23, I think oils start cracking sooner than that 100 years anyhow. Quicker nowadays because fewer artists know how to paint with them to make them last and others experiment in a way that makes them less likely to last. At the time of Botticelli, numbers of their pigments were fugitive, too (and if my recall from that book I mentioned that I cannot remember who authored, known to painters be fugitive). I also recall DaVinci frescoes have peeled away and been heavily in-painted (a now controversial conservation practice) because his experimental working techniques made them less durable. People paint with encaustic (wax) which melts near heat -- I remember an artist showing a number of pieces here years ago had his pieces start to melt because they were placed too near sunlight in the gallery -- but at the same time, wax portraits survive from the Coptic period. It's amazing what does survive.

I am curious on the cotton thing, too; I prefer linen over cotton as a painting surface because I prefer the texture and feel of the linen surface over the cotton surface. You can get different grades (different thread count?) of linen (and of cotton as well, I think -- once again, short memory on this), though I am not sure how much of a difference it makes.

I will say, however, that skillful paint handling is more important than the surface support or the particular brand of paints. Something I never mastered. Oh, well.

five

typo... that was supposed to be 9 in 10 cancer victims have painted, 1 out of 10 painters get cancer.

five

Another typo... should have been "the numbers are NO where near this" I should go to sleep.