Re: Why Winsor & Newton?

From: Judy Seigel ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 06/01/05-04:43:20 PM Z
Message-id: <>

On Tue, 31 May 2005, Robert M wrote:
> I also said we should be able to discuss the question because some might
> want to know why W/N is preferred. So I asked why the topic (apparently) was
> off limits. I will accept I might have missed some minor point.

The topic was certainly not off limits... but I did think I explained, at
least from my experience. To repeat in brief, in the old days we didn't
have the knowledge of either paint or gum printing we have today.
Photographers especially were at sea. Many paints didn't work. WN, besides
being widely available, ALSO was relatively free of fillers & other agents
that caused trouble.

> ... By "hearted"
> do you mean always nice and never disagreeable?

Of course not. I mean from the heart.

> Just because someone says something on the list, has an "alt "web site or
> publishes a magazine, this does not make the presented information true.

You're singing my song.

> You assume it is too hard to make your own paints and it takes too much
> time. Not true. OK, perhaps for you and others it is simply too much bother
> and if you like the results you obtain using squeeze tubes, I see no reason
> to bother with pigment/paint/dye formulations or worries about photo
> chemistry. For people like me, I do indeed think making paints is worthwhile
> and not a bother. I also think if you were to experiment, you might discover
> that some very cheap paints will work as well or better than W/N.

I've done dye transfer, made my own water colors, also my own oil paints,
among other occupations. My experience is that *no* cheap paints (or none
I've tried) have the pigment density of the more expensive paints --
that's how they economize, with fillers (ammonium hydrate is the term that
comes to mind, may not be right). In any event, I did say I now use Daniel
Smith watercolors, which were not in existence in "the olden days." My
point is that I only have 24 hours in a day & other demands on my time.

> when you make your own pigments, you know exactly what is in the compound.

All I need to know is how (or if) the paint works. And although some
folks prefer to work with dry pigment, for other than one-coat prints, I
don't like results as well as with tube watercolor. End of "test."

> By the way, powered pigment colors eliminate much of the work involved in
> making paints. Some powdered pigments are as finely ground as the pigments
> used by commercial manufacturers. Or available special order.

As was explained to me by Mark Golden, of Golden paints, some 10 years
ago... any "dry pigment" we buy will be MORE finely ground than we can
possibly need. The problem comes with mulling it so that the oil or gum
surrounds every particle, otherwise it will clump. That is better done by
machine than by Judy-elbow, is my conclusion and experience. Dave and
others may have better elbows ...or more time or possibly patience.

> As for seeing a movie of the process, I do not need to. I know people in the
> business and I understand how paint is manufactured.

But not, perhaps, how it is modified in the alternative process, as
observed directly above.

> ..I have written about
> the manufacturing process for a well known manufacturer of artist's colors.
> I have toured more than one plant in my day. Paints and pigments are
> something I understand. You are not the only "expert" on this list, Judy.

I am the only expert in my studio. But this discussion may prove what I
said about "correcting to death." Not. I think some facts are drawn out
not currently in circulation & add to sum total of (current) list
knowledge. (Some of it's in the archive, however.)

>> I wouldn't sooth my vision or soothe it either with paint. In fact my
>> vision doesn't need soothing, quite the contrary. If I wanted fully
>> "realistic" color or "realistic" anything else, however, I would make
>> c-prints.

> So, in other words, you do have a vision. You do not want realistic colors.

Why does it have to be either/or? I know it when I see it. I do not set
up in advance what "it" should be. So I permit the camera and the process
to give me gifts. Which on a good day, or year, they do.

Received on Wed Jun 1 16:43:36 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 07/07/05-11:30:54 AM Z CST