 |
06-02-2004, 09:57 PM
|
#1
|
SOG Member FT Professional '04 Merit Award PSA '04 Best Portfolio PSA '03 Honors Artists Magazine '01 Second Prize ASOPA Perm. Collection- Ntl. Portrait Gallery Perm. Collection- Met Leads Workshops
Joined: May 2002
Location: Great Neck, NY
Posts: 1,093
|
Thanks Richard. I wish there was such a book. The problem is, as I see it, that most authors, as well as teachers, don't really search for the answers but merely repeat rhetoric. It is my contention that most good artists are successful in spite of and not because of their training.
My goal is to understand how things work and why. True knowledge is what turns me on and it seems to get my students pretty darn excited as well. It would be a pleasure to give answering whatever questions you come up with a shot.
|
|
|
06-07-2004, 12:04 PM
|
#2
|
Juried Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Portland, ME
Posts: 197
|
Money in the bank!
I'm a little surprised at the lack of gratitude towards Marvin in his bringing to bear the subject of dispensing with cadmiums. I don't mean in regard to the improvement of your flesh tones - I mean the improvement in your bank account! Cadmium paints are notoriously expensive compared to earth colors - think of the savings!
Why, you'll be able to send yourself to - mmmaybe - a Mattelson workshop!!!
All kidding aside, from every arguable point of view, be it historically-based (as it is) or no, the Paxton palette makes the most sense. The amount of overmixing I've done in order to tweak the chroma out of cadmium colors has been enough to give my right forearm a "Popeye" look.
I know it seems so unlike me, Marvin, to cop so quickly to something you've suggested. Perhaps I'm not as stubborn as I was when I was a student. Could it be that having 2 kids has worn down my stoicism?
Be well, and keep that Flake White off your toast!
|
|
|
06-07-2004, 12:23 PM
|
#3
|
PHOTOGRAPHY MODERATOR SOG Member '03 Finalist Taos SOPA '03 HonMen SoCal ASOPA '03 Finalist SoCal ASOPA '04 Finalist Taos SOPA
Joined: Dec 2001
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Posts: 2,674
|
Am I to understand that Michael Harding's Flake White #2 is a substitute for his Flake White?
If you only purchase one which would you choose?
__________________
Mike McCarty
|
|
|
06-07-2004, 01:18 PM
|
#4
|
SOG Member FT Professional '04 Merit Award PSA '04 Best Portfolio PSA '03 Honors Artists Magazine '01 Second Prize ASOPA Perm. Collection- Ntl. Portrait Gallery Perm. Collection- Met Leads Workshops
Joined: May 2002
Location: Great Neck, NY
Posts: 1,093
|
Rob,
I dunno, having two kids hasn't changed me one bit. I'm just as stubborn as always. I am, however, always on the lookout for bigger truths. If I see evidence of a better way I would change what I do in a heartbeat. My allegiance is to the quality of the work I do, not to any doctrine or theology. I'm glad you've tried the cadmium alternative and it works for you.
Mike,
Flake white #2 is softer than #1 so it depends on the results you desire. If chunky paint is your goal go with #1 or if you desire more relative fluidity (or a better spread for your crackers Rob) #2 is the Flake for you. I prefer #2.
Michael Harding began making #2 after Winsor and Newton stopped. Both still make #1.
Again, Flake is comprised of lead which is toxic if ingested or if dust is inhaled. Wash hands before eating and don't sand it down without a wearing a mask. It cannot be absorbed through unbroken skin nor does it give off toxic fumes.
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing this Topic: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:22 PM.
|