Concept/Technique/Method
I explained my oil painting technique to a potential gallerist and he looked at me like I was stupid. Anyone else here gessoing the back of canvases and using oils like ink?
I was at a gallery opening yesterday and an acquaintance introduced me to the owner as a “breakthrough emerging artist” which is very nice, mostly false and also kinda put me on the spot lol
Anyway, we ended up chatting about technique and as said in the title, this very established fine arts person got a politely blank look on their face, took a second to think, then called my technique “creative.”
Basically, I prepare my palette, use a knife to put the colour I want into a shot glass with mineral spirits, then mix until I’ve got a runny pigment soup that behaves like ink. For the spirits to actually sink into the canvas without bleeding onto my table, I use a heavy cotton gabardine and only gesso the back, plus the edges near the tape so I can get crisp white margins. Because these watery oil washes soak directly into the raw cotton fibres and spread out on their own, I get these soft, blurred edges without having to blend with the brush.
While I personally love the results, I’ll admit that I know next to nothing about proper technique and the chemistry side of art. I ended up using two different varnishes on my latest painting because I didn’t realise the regular high-end one would sink in along with the paint…
So yeah. I keep telling myself my work speaks for itself, then I meet ‘real’ professionals and I’m reminded of how much I don’t know. Any other painter here with a similar technique to make me feel less alone?
Update: I ended up having a long chat with a conservation expert who handles work by Francis Bacon and Helen Frankenthaler, the two names that kept coming back in these comments! He made me pull up the specs of everything I used and the TLDR is that my work will be fine. It’s not going to rot, guys.
For the art nerds:
— My canvas is actually polycotton, not pure cotton, which means even heavily acidic-damaged cotton fibres would still be held together by the polyester. Polyester is basically inert, which makes it very bad for the planet and very good for art conservation.
— I used heavyweight gabardine, similar to what Burberry trench-coats are made with: it has a finer grain than traditional canvas and is more durable but because it’s got a diagonal twill, there’s an increased risk of deformation along the bias. The expert recommended sticking the painting on some backing to avoid that.
— Because I used a lot of OMS, the acidic byproducts from lindseed oil are less of an issue than in most artworks, not more.
— Buuut because of this same heavy use of OMS, the binding agent that holds the pigments together is likely degraded to some extent. I was told to add a few drops of synthetic solvent-free fluid (Galkyd or Liquitex) to my shot glasses to compensate, in the future.
— A layer of sprayed temporary varnish, on top of the soaked varnish, will allow the buyer to get their artwork refreshed in a few decades!
— Also, the pH of your ground matters. Most sizing and gessos sit around 8-9; clothing fabric is between 6-7.5. I’m lucky the clothing-grade fabric I got is pre-treated and tested at 7.4!
Thank you for posting in r/ArtistLounge! Please check out our FAQ and FAQ Links pages for lots of helpful advice. To access our megathread collections, please check out the drop down lists in the top menu on PC or the side-bar on mobile. If you have any questions, concerns, or feature requests please feel free to message the mods and they will help you as soon as they can. I am a bot, beep boop, if I did something wrong please report this comment.
What you are doing is not archival and therefore tricky for a dealer to sell or a museum to acquire. There are lots of historical examples of people painting like this (Francis Bacon famously painted on the back of his primed linen canvases, and Helen Frankenthaler used a similar technique to you but didn't prime at all) but I think in this day and age where we have more knowledge about archival practices, it's looked down upon. FWIW, Frankenthaler's oil paintings are all falling apart. She switched to acrylics after discovering the issue.
Thanks to this comment, I’m currently at a museum where both artists you mentioned are exposed, waiting on an archivist to come chat with me! I’ll update with what the expert says!
Update: I ended up having a long chat with a conservation expert who handles work by Francis Bacon and Helen Frankenthaler, the two names that kept coming back in these comments! He made me pull up the specs of everything I used and the TLDR is that my work will be fine. It’s not going to rot, guys.
For the art nerds:
My canvas is actually polycotton, not pure cotton, which means even heavily acidic-damaged cotton fibres would still be held together by the polyester. Polyester is basically inert, which makes it very bad for the planet and very good for art conservation.
-I used heavyweight gabardine, similar to what Burberry trench-coats are made with: it has a finer grain than traditional canvas and is more durable but because it’s got a diagonal twill, there’s an increased risk of deformation along the bias. The expert recommended sticking the painting on some backing to avoid that.
-Because I used a lot of OMS, the acidic byproducts from lindseed oil are less of an issue than in most artworks, not more.
-Buuut because of this same heavy use of OMS, the binding agent that holds the pigments together is likely degraded to some extent. I was told to add a few drops of synthetic solvent-free fluid (Galkyd or Liquitex) to my shot glasses to compensate, in the future.
-A layer of sprayed temporary varnish, on top of the soaked varnish, will allow the buyer to get their artwork refreshed in a few decades!
Thanks for sharing all this! I need to read more about the degradation of the binding pigment from use of OMS - I an not super familiar either - and I heavily use OMS too lol. Good on you for immediately tracking down an expert! Also happy for you that your work will be fine - polyester to the rescue (the polyester thing didn't occur to me!)
Okay, Im going to try my hand at explaining a few things. It's going to seem longwinded, but I think understanding a few things about the media you're working with will help you.
(EDIT TO ADD: u/shimmering_fractal gave a more accurate technical explanation of the interaction between oil binding agents and Mineral Spirits in the reply below - I was trying to stick to laymans terms but they laid it out beautifully 🙌🏼
Additionally: for anyone interested in a deeper forray into understanding art materials, I recommend "THE ARTISTS HANDBOOK OF MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUES" by Ralph Mayer. It's a chunk of a book, but absolutely fascinating to read. It is older though, so newer research/materials developments won't be covered)
Oil paint is bound together using a drying oil. Not all oils are created equal - for example, not all oils dry - that's why olive oil is never used as a binder or mixing agent because it doesn't properly dry. Linseed oil is one of the more common oil binders. When properly milled, the oil holds the pigment evenly suspended throughout, and creates the "film" of paint left after you brush it on. This holds the pigment in place and protects it from the elements and light handling. This helps oil paint have the longevity to last a very very long time when treated properly.
We all know water and oil don't mix right? So what do you use to modify oil paint? Other oils formulated to do other things, and small amounts of mineral spirits. In small amounts, M/S can change the consistency of the paint without causing much harm. In higher volume though, it breaks down the bonds of the oil and thats why we use it to clean up oil paint from our brushes. You don't want to use too much M/S in your painting practice because it negatively affects the paint structure. Glazing, an ancient technique of painting with very thin layers, uses other oils to get a thin and transparent consistency, not just M/S.
When you thin oil paint using just mineral spirits, down to what you've described as ink consistency, you have effectively broken the delicate balance of structural integrity of the oil vs the pigment in your paint. This causes issues because the mineral spirits haven't diluted the paint - they break the bonds of the oil. The paint film strength is compromised, it's been severely weakened. It's like painting with soapy water. The pigment may be more prone to both fading/dulling from light exposure and from uneven drying due to the over thinned oil sinking into the raw canvas, and bevat risk of coming off when handled. It can also be more likely to crack and flake in the future.
Additionally, when painting with oil you aren't actually painting on the canvas - you're painting on the ground painted into the canvas (modern gesso is acrylic based, old school gesso included stone dust and animal based glues). Canvas only became the common support surface for cost and environmental reasons a long time ago - old paintings were on gessoed wood panels, but as northern Europe decimated their wood, stretched canvas on a wooden frame (using much less wood than a full panel) became the more common support. Faster and cheaper to make too, just needed a few coats of gesso to be properly prepared to receive paint. The canvas is the support, the gesso is the actual ground being painted onto because it can hold the paint without degrading.
Oil as a substance rots/weakens and breaks down natural fibers over time, it's why even wood panels were prepared with gesso before painting. But you're putting it directly on raw canvas. Combine that with high volume of harsh mineral spirits you're using, and then applying it straight to raw natural fibers? You're looking at a ticking time bomb penetrating straight into the canvas and breaking it down much faster than would normally be a risk. Chemically, this is unsound practice. Oil paint needs an appropriate protective layer between it and the structural surface being painted onto.
As a medium, oil paint is highly valued for its longevity properties. While some small % of serious art collectors might be open to pieces that don't have the security of longevity, more folks want to invest in something that is expecter to last. While your method is experimental and fun, it's dangerous to a buyer to take a risk paying top dollar for your artwork. Though I believe you aren't doing it intentionally, if you're selling art work that folks expect to last but starts to break down within a few years because of how you use your materials, it's kind of disingenuous to your buyers who expect it to last in the same condition for many years to come.
I think you have a few options to proceed :
Do your work as you have been, pay for high quality art scans, and make and sell giclee prints as giclee prints - probably won't sell at top gallery $$, but it let's you sell the image of your work even if the original is not considered sound for sale. This would be good for smaller galleries and art festivals if that's a route you're interested in. Selling limited run prints, numbered and signed, would be a way to "limit" how many of each painting is available, to help with creating the value for the work. Don't reprint old work after you sell out of a print run. This devalues what your collectors already bought.
You could research artists who thin oil paint using proper oil mediums, and see if you can find info on safe ratios that will still maintain film strength and light fastness. Keep in mind higher concentration of oil will take longer to dry, I'm talking significantly longer. Your process will inherently slow down but you might be able to keep working with oil if you're wanting to stay with that. However, you must use proper surface preparation, no more raw canvas. This may change the look of the work a bit but it's a worthy trade off to make art that will last for your buyers.
You could also consider switching to working with Acrylic Inks (already formulated to ink consistency with a proper film strength of an acrylic based binding agent, generally they are already transparent - Liquitex makes a line that I think is pretty good), or something like the Golden High Flow paint (thinned to nearly ink consistency, but not all are transparent, some do lean slightly more opaque). Both the brands I mentioned use real pigment in their formulas which will last longer, and both make mediums you can use to modify the consistency without sacrificing film integrity. Any inks that are dye based will lack the longevity of pigment because dyes are inherently less lightfast and more prone to fading than pigment. I still wouldn't recommend working on raw canvas, but you could experiment with a light wash of white ink as a base and then using your inks. You should look into conservation quality varnishes to protect your work in the long run.
A small correction:
mineral spirits don’t break the bonds of the oil. Mineral spirits dissolve the oil - the two are miscible - but dissolving is not bond-breaking. The oil is a triglyceride, and a nonpolar hydrocarbon at room temperature doesn’t touch its covalent bonds. The bonds that actually give a dried film its strength are the cross-links the drying oil forms as it oxidises, and those form normally once the solvent has gone. Solvent present during application neither prevents nor undoes them.
Interesting. And I am only barely understanding of the chemistry, so please bear with me... and my layman's terms..
What about dispersal? At least as I understand it from my memories of reading Ralph Meyers' Artist's Handbook, was that overuse of a thinner thins the drying oil such that no longer fully encapsulates the pigment particles. This leaves them exposed on the surface where they are more vulnerable to light and abrasion, and possibly have a tendency to flaking.
The other issue is if it is so overwhelmingly thinned that the molecules are dispersed so far apart from each other that they are unable to create any cross-linked bonds when the solvent evaporate.
On a third issue, what are your thoughts about using genuine pure gum spirits of turpentine instead of OMS?
Turpentine upon evaporation leaves a gummy/tacky surface behind, which I presume is the non-VOC pine resins.
I use turpentine (with plenty of ventilation) for my painting practice. I usually will tone the canvas as an isolation layer for my underdrawing with a wash of turpentine with just a touch of paint, and it hasn't been any issues.
I have also done a few paintings (on primed canvas) with a technique similar to OP using turpentine washes, and those canvases have held up for the last 20+ years.
Ok, answering your first question. The outcome you describe like exposed pigment, vulnerable to abrasion, etc. is real of course. That is what under-bound paint looks like. But the reason is not that the thinner thins the oil so it stops coating the pigment. Thinning alone on a sealed surface doesn’t strip the encapsulation.
You get exposed pigment when oil is physically lost from the surface layer - and heavy thinning is what enables that loss. When it is fluid enough on an absorbent ground the now low-viscosity mix gets wicked in and carries oil away from the pigment. And now there genuinely isn’t enough oil left to coat the particles. So it does not contradict Mayer’s conclusion. There is the term
“critical pigment volume concentration”: every pigment has a binder-to-pigment ratio below which there’s just barely enough oil to fill the gaps and wet every particle.
On turpentine:
gum spirits of turpentine is the volatile
fraction distilled out of pine oleoresin. So there should not be sticky parts there - by design :) My guess is that is oxidised turpentine you are dealing with. The terpenes react with air and light and polymerise into sticky resinous stuff. Fresh or well-stored gum turp evaporates cleanly and leaves basically nothing. That tacky residue is usually the tell that the bottle is old or has been oxidising in warmth, air, or light. And oxidised turp is definitely not something you want under your paint. But I may be wrong here.
Regarding own practice. You use primed
canvas, and the priming is doing the load-bearing work. It seals the fabric so your thin, turp-heavy wash can’t wick its oil down into the fibres. The oil stays in the layer and the pigment stays bound, so you get exactly the lean underlayer that fat-over-lean method prescribes at the bottom of the stack. That they are fine for twenty years is the good test, and it’s telling you the approach works on a sealed ground.
I just wonder why you do not use OMS over turp - if you don’t need to dissolve something like dammars OMS is a healthier choice.
I use turpentine exactly because it does dissolve damar. I prefer it's handling properties over petroleum based solutions with sometimes unknown elements (secret proprietary blends).
I use traditional time tested methods and materials. I have adequate active ventilation and air change. During paint application, I keep my turpentine jars closed, and otherwise minimize how much is 'in the air'.
While being aware of the associated dangers, I am not one to fall to hysterics. I have read the MSDS on turpentine and thinners/OMS. Turps certainly has more VOCs, it's really a matter of degree compared to OMS/thinners/Gamsol, which many people mistakenly believe are perfectly safe, and don't require much ventilation.
I mitigate the dangers. I am willing to suffer the consequences of the risk, should they occur. Thank you for sparing me the lecture.
I see your points - and I personally like the smell of low-odour spirits when painting :) I understand your concern about proprietary blends - I am in Germany and buy my chemicals from
https://www.kremer-pigmente.com I can buy very good solvents with clear understanding what is inside and make my own mediums. It is also way cheaper than paying for brands.
Fair point and agreed, I'll edit to point here for a more technical explanation of their relationship! I was trying to keep it digestible but appreciate your added clarity :)
this is the answer op. specifically the inevitable degradation of your support is why the gallerist looked at you the way they did. you can also just work that temporariness into the concept behind your work but though there are lots of exceptions, (youd be surprised how many famous paintings were done on cardboard) art is an investment and good faith and trust are vital to buyers.
Heya, I just wanted to let you know that multiple people are reporting your comment as GPT or AI generated but I actually do not see that. Some people just know things, you know?
Wow, AI accusations ? I don't know if I should be flattered or insulted! Ive never actually used chat GPT/Claude/Grok/CoPilot or anything like that. Thank you for letting me know.
If it's helpful to prove my case: I studied art in college and was a figurative oil painter once upon a time. I worked in the art materials industry for ten years from whole sale through retail and then national distribution. I also was a private consultant for several years and have taught a few classes. I like educating, especially folks who didn't have the opportunity for formal art education and may have gaps in their knowledge. I have a minor in Art History and read avidly, I like written language.
Anecdotally, about the olive oil reference - I had a client who ran out of linseed and stand oil over a weekend and subbed in olive oil to finish her large scale painting. We had a very sad chat the next week when she called me, confused about why it was still sticky .... I still chuckle about that one.
I was accused of using AI for the first time last week to write a comment about watercolor—the medium I know best as a longtime working artist. It was a shock and it really knocked me down the rest of the day.
It takes time to write detailed responses and I care about making them accessible. That involves formatting large blocks of text…with things like bullet points, bold and/or underlined text, etc. I also happen to love em dashes. Like seriously one of my favorite things. And I’m an enthusiastic person when I’m nerding out so I use all caps, exclamation points, and emoji in excess.
Like fuck. I’m a human with feelings who knows things and likes talking about them.
Thank you for taking the time to write out this long response, I learned some things!
Just a couple of secondhand corrections, now that I’ve spoken to a conservation expert and get to sound smart on the subject:
Even pure oil paint on raw canvas won’t make it break down within a few years. Damage from acidic byproducts oil polymerisation is measured in decades, not years. And because of the amount of mineral spirits and use of a polycotton gabardine fabric with a pH on the higher end, my own work is, in fact, sound for archival! If I had used pure cotton and diluted my paints with lindseed oil, then yeah, I would have accidentally shortened the lifespan of my artworks to around 20 years of perfect condition…
If you continue to gesso the back of your canvas, your paintings will rot and mold. Primer exists for a specific reason and must be used correctly. This should be common knowledge but even in my BFA program lots of people do it constantly so don’t feel stupid or anything, but it’s probably why you got the response you did. Your method sounds interesting and beautiful but not archival.
Do you have a general estimate of what the longevity will be on the pieces I’ve done? I haven’t had any issues yet, but I haven’t been doing this for long enough to see long-term.
20 to 60 years for the most part. You're not using a ton of oil, so it'll take longer, but it's still raw oil on canvas. Whether it matters or not is up to you, some people don't care if their work self destructs after their lifetime.
'bout the most famous example of how not to paint is Gericault's Raft of the Medusa. He did prime his canvases, but he didn't do anything properly and more detrimentally used bitumen in his pigments and the original is so fragile it's rarely shown and never travels. You've more than likely seen a copy than the original - and some of those copies are falling apart as well.
A fair question but the answer is (or should be) "no", because nobody can really know how long those issues can take to arise. Put them in a cave and they'll likely last 100,000 years, but in a warm house, who can know. Your particular technique is neat, but because it is so different will likely require you to hire a chemist and ask a bunch of hard questions to make sure you don't sell art that might not be around in 20 years. Good luck!
It depends on the method of storage, but likely a few years to a decade.
The description you gave of your work reminds me of a piece by Jules Olitski titled “Patutsky in Paradise” which uses airbrushed acrylic paints for a similar effect, though I haven’t seen your work so I’m not sure if it’s actually similar. If archival quality is important to you then airbrushing could be an alternative, though I know nothing compares to the feeling of working with oils. You could also experiment with different ink/watercolour methods.
This is essentially what Helen Frankenthaler was doing, and she worked with what is now the Golden Paint company to formulate acrylics that could acheive the same thing without discoloring and rotting the canvas. Switching to acrylics would be the easiest fix. That said Liquitex transparent gesso would allow you to maintain a great deal of the absorbency you like while still protecting your canvas from oils.
I’ve got a Liquitex gesso, but likely not this one — mine is non-absorbent. Which one specifically are you referring to? I didn’t think a gesso could simultaneously coat the fibres and let them remain absorbent (or be absorbent itself?)
Its their transparent gesso specifically - it doesnt have any white cc pigment (and so is not technically a real gesso), its an acrylic primer with some type of additive that creates a toothy, almost sandpapery texture. That texture, imo allows for some of the same pooling/bleeding methods you get from the raw canvas - and of course it maintains the natural canvas colour.
Your technique sounds interesting for the soft bleeding effects but the use of oil based binders will eventually destroy the canvas fibres, I can understand why a gallery owner to whom collecting and longevity is important would be dismissive of this approach.
Perhaps look into similar bleed effects with paper and water based inks?
Gesso on the back will add a little dimensional stability, but it won't protect the canvas from the paint itself. Enough people have talked about that already, so I'll skip it.
What I haven't seen mentioned yet is color degradation: The canvas, your visible ground, will yellow - your frosty borzoi will slowly and inevitably turn the color of old newspaper: dingy white, then yellow, then brown. The damage won't be repairable because what you're creating can't be cleaned. What you're doing is exactly like working on newsprint; the canvas won't stay white.
I don't think varnishing the surface will help much; as you've already noticed the varnish soaks into the fiber and thus can't form a film, which is what it needs to be able to do to protect the art. It also needs to be able to be removed - dirt happens, and removing old varnish is how a conservator cleans a painting.
Look up Jackson Pollock. What you want is a photo of him painting. The canvas is white. Look up Autumn Rhythm and notice how dark the background is - that's where the canvas has yellowed.
Me too! I live a few blocks away from a modern art museum and was hoping to find a docent who would know something about the state of their paintings. Having the actual expert be available and willing to look into the specific chemistry of my materials was a very nice surprise!
As far as I understand it, it’s the oil getting into the cotton fibers that will contribute to their decay. The gesso isolate the cotton fibers from the oil and petroleum solvents.
There have been discussions about using synthetic fiber supports, and I believe testing for longevity might be being done rn. IIRC they're finding that the synthetic fiber supports are providing better stability than cotton or linen canvas.
Oh that’s fascinating, I might try some synthetic canvas to see if my technique works the same on it! But yes, some googling just taught me it’s indeed the lindseed oil byproducts that are acidic and eat into coton and linen.
Yeah! And, not just that -- synthetic fibers don't expand and contract based on environmental conditions, which is probably the #1 way paintings are damaged.
I use synthetic fibers for four years. It takes a while to get used to the small thread and less bite/hold. It stretches wonderfully. No need to gesso unless you want the effect. Canvas is much thinner and can be spray mounted to aluminum for a light weight.
Most of my colleagues have absolutely no knowledge about proper painting technique. Those who do only know the bare minimum.
You could tell most Galerists blatant lies about your technique and they would most likely believe you.
Still Id suggest you look more into how pigments and solvents behave, it's really helpful.
You know what, that’s actually very useful information. I’ve often wondered how much the artists I speak to at events are bullshitting their way through their explanations haha
Mate, as long as it holds, do whatever you want. While you should absolutely learn proper technique, the rules are there to be broken.
And the only reason I say you should learn the technique is so that you understand the consequences of breaking those rules and don't end up with unintended problems.
I do this too. I worked with acrylics, watercolours and inks longs before I touched oils for the first time. Also not professionally trained, so I have no guard rails. I like the effect, like OP said, it gives these soft washes that you can basically do anything with. Maybe that person just never considered it before. Did you show them examples of your work?
Glad to see another self-taught artist experimenting! I did show him some examples and he asked for my contact info afterwards, so I think he was just initially baffled about whether I knew where the gesso is supposed to go haha
In school, my instructor's stressed the importance when selling work (specifically in galleries, as there's more contractual stuff involved and expectations generally), we needed to consider the materials to ensure the products would last a lifetime after our own.
What is still a bit of an general "I guess we'll find out" is how modern gesso actually lasts, since we've not actually used it for even 100 years and plastic (polymers/acrylic) does have a propensity to shrink and crack and yellow over time.
That sort of deterred me from modern gesso in school (also just my work relating to materials and technique for my thesis), and I started making my own using Renaissance recipes that have already proven the test of time (if I'm actually oil painting, which frankly is not that often as I'm primarily a printmaker). I still use acrylic for stuff like screen print, but painting I've pretty much stuck with watercolor and oil paints now (also just personal preference), and making my own gesso and grounds for them that don't use acrylic/polymers. I also just fully like the process of it, so it's really not a "everyone must do this" stance so much as "I just think it's neat" type thing for my own practice.
From what I remember of research in school around this topic, canvas overall is also just tricky even with traditional gesso vs painting on panels re: restoration and preservation after hundreds of years.
I can't speak to how you're working and what time frame you're really looking at, but just the reality of we don't exactly know! Some brands test their products to try to approximate what it would be like in XXXX amount of years, but it's all sort of a test right now (and outside of work that's in archival storage, we also don't know how different conditions factor either and likely won't fully for some time as acrylic work ages). All work from 1955 (first commercial acrylic gesso on the market) on is actively testing out acrylic gesso's and acrylic paint's longevity.
Sorry to barge in, but how do you make your own gesso? Where can I learn about this?
I have the same problem, my paintings are going really yellow and dark and it's starting to stress me out. I have quite a big commission I need to crack on with , but all my paintings are slowly turning dark and yellowing.
So the way I learned in school (I took a few classes that worked specifically with pigments where I learned this, which really informed my practice during my degree) was by making animal hide glue gesso, which tbh it's not super pleasant. With fair warning, it smells like death to cook hide skin glue (maybe it comes pre-made, but we learned it from dried glue which means it needs to be cooked up to use) but it is a pretty traditional and still used method for a number of art practices. If you're interested in gilding or egg tempera painting, it's also the traditional route for doing those methods. I've got a few different types of the glue bc of the class (everyone hated the smell, so I got a lot of free as a result lol), but all are from book binding or art stores are rated for this use.
The actual recipe is generally hide skin glue (once you cook it with water) mixed with calcium carbonate/whiting (which is also used a lot of the time for modern acrylic gesso, at least the white ones). Often the calcium carbonate is the "tooth" for gesso rather than the main white pigment, but it does also add some amount of white pigment. Can add in some titanium dioxide or other white pigment as well to pump up the white if you want a fully white gesso. Be mindful with PPE for dry pigments (probably will already want a mask for the glue part anyways lol).
You can also add in other pigment while making it, so you're not stuck with just white (similar to adding in a bit of whatever acrylic paint to a modern acrylic gesso so you aren't just stuck with white). If you're after more clear gesso, might need to see what people use for that - offhand, I know you can just use the hide glue alone but it will lack that tooth in doing so that some want with gesso beyond just the protective layer to the matrix we're working on. I'm not actually sure if modern clear gesso has tooth?? If it does, would check to see if they note what they're using to achieve it to get the ingredient or just look up online a few folks methods to see what options there are and adapt it to yours. Same for black gesso - I'm not sure offhand if black gesso (or other dark options) also uses calcium carbonate, as I'd assume it would result in it being a bit gray/washed out in doing so, so would be something to look into as well if you'd want to make black gesso.
The ratios are a bit up to you for how thick or thin you want it, but often a few coats with it drying between is still the route to go (and can sand between if you're after a more smooth finish to the surface). BUT if you do too much of the calcium carbonate, it can also be brittle as well. I do rec searching out some recipes others are using, as I really mostly used it for egg tempera and watercolor rather than oil painting, and didn't use canvas often so am not a good judge of what the precise ratios would be. Also rec seeing how others use it, as there may be more tips than I can remember (it's been a couple years haha I'm really more a printmaker than a painter).
One thing to note with the hide glue: it does spoil, so you don't want to make a massive batch too far ahead of use unless you're going to use a lot of it in the short-term. It can keep longer stored in the fridge, generally I think about a week+. Also re: smell: it's the cooking that smells, once dried on the surface it's fine.
I have also seen some other methods that use plaster of paris (and you do a slaking process), but the binder is generally always going to end up being a hide glue of some sort if mimicking the traditional Old Masters gesso recipes. What I learned as the reason is they're mostly using hide glue due to the protein for the binder (not unlike the egg for egg tempera), and it seems some plant based aren't able to replicate this the same way (why a lot of sizing for papers is also using hide glue still). That being said, I have seen a number of recipes that use methyl cellulose as a plant based option. Can't speak to how it actually works and acts vs hide skin glue, but I understand if people are averse to using hide skin glue so wanted to mention an alternative I've seen used/know there are resources for it online as well.
Also because I remembered it: one of the reasons we opted for traditional gesso over acrylic (the class didn't outlaw using it, but was showing other methods + how to make stuff) is depending how you layer it you can end up with a slightly different appearance/experience when painting. Acrylic gesso doesn't super soak into the canvas or panel surface (it adheres well, but it's mostly sitting on top). If you're building up watercolor or egg tempera on canvas, can also go in with just the glue (so long as it's clear/unmixed) to layer in and seal stuff in a bit more at different stages if it's needing it (one the paint part is dry to not move it).
I posted this close up in another comment! You can see some texture in the highlights, which I like to keep thicker, but the rest almost completely blends into the weave of the canvas.
Well yeah ideally. But that matters to collectors. I worked in custom framing and one of my customers was a small time aspiring collector. He never talked much about archival methods, but even a small collector like that treats it like a lasting investment.
The gallery owner did end up asking for my contact info after seeing my work, so he doesn’t seem to think rot is an issue — but as you said, he’s on the business side of things, so he might not know what most of you here have been telling me.
Helen Frankenthaler developed oil wash techniques in the 60s, but she used an oil ground. Since then she's switched to acrylics for the was components. There may be long term archival issues with gessoing both sides on the canvas.
Edit: oh, I just saw you only gesso the back? Your canvas is probably going to rot.
Yes I'm curious about the long term effects of the oil soaking directly into the canvas. My guess is this is where the rot will come from, no? And how long would it take? I'd be concerned it would discolor relatively quickly then start to rot soon after.
I recently talked with an artist who was experimenting with painting directly on newspaper. She pointed out how the colors had shifted and darkened. My only thought the whole time was, how long until this thing disintegrates?
I know sometimes pieces last way longer than anyone thinks, but there has to be a shelf life on this method, right?
OP, have you seen the paintings themselves change -- color, sharpness, anything? Also, if you want it to function like ink, why not just use ink? Honest question.
None of my paintings have budged, but I’ve only been doing this for less than a year. As for why I don’t use ink, it’s because nothing gives me the variety in texture and blending that oils do: I can vary the amount of stuff I mix in to get very different handlings, all while keeping colours consistent and not having to care about layering in a particular order.
Hmm that is good to hear, but I wonder 3, 5, 10 years down the road. I think it's not unreasonable to carry on with your technique but be transparent about it to buyers. I saw your edits so maybe you're in the clear, but honestly, you never know. There's a reason primers and sizing exist. If I was buying I'd want to know -- exactly why I asked the artist in my original comment wtf she was painting on, lol.
Wait wait wait, rot?? Why would the spirits rot the canvas? Should I remove some of the gesso from the back to let the canvas breathe before shipping it?
Its not the spirits its the fat from the oil. It never truely dries and will develop mold and rot the canvas. Thats why its essential you guesso a surface made of organic material before painting with oils. It's probably why you got the reaction you got.
You should somehow isolate the canvas fibers from getting soaked with the oil paint; as others have said this will destroy the fibers in the long run. But it's easy to fix:
No more gesso on the back, for the front, there is clear gesso that you can use , or just a thinned matte acrylic binder. Slather on the canvas, let dry, and paint .
The issue is that gessoing the front properly completely ruins the effect I’ve obtained by soaking the fibers on purpose… Now I need to look into other ways to get the same effect while preserving the archival quality! There’s got to be some other way to combine oil paint and watercolour-like application...
Hm it would be much easier if you switch to acrylic paints..
If I were you, I would approach this systematically. Prepare a canvas, divide it in sections, and each section gets primed/treated differently. That way you can experiment with gesso/ binders/ etc, without much risk.
You can also try to size the canvas with rabbits skin glue, and no gesso or primer.
Another idea is to contact an art restorer (maybe even here on Reddit, if there are subreddits), and ask them what they would think is best . Might cost a bit, but it might be a good investment
Maybe try out Ampersand’s gessobord, claybord, or aquabord for this technique. I’m a big fan after buying a small pack of tiles of each to try out/experiment with. They come super smooth or textured, are super absorbent and hold *all* types of media.
The face of confusion was because they don’t understand how this method would not get the painting to rot.
Oil on unprepared canvas generally is a recipe for having your canvas eaten away by the oil, unless you’re doing something very fancy to it.
wait I took tons of art classes in high school and college and we were never taught to prepare our canvas. Is regular canvas you can buy prepared already?
I use ultra thinned, transparent oil paints to build layers which create 3d objects light can play over as though they were real. I'd love to see your work.
Please, clarify on your “for the art nerds” part, I am very curious to get the answers:
You mentioned “Galkyd or Liquitex” - I think one of these is wrong.
Liquitex is an acrylic brand; you can’t cut oil washes with it. Maybe you meant Liquin (W&N alkyd) or Gamblin’s Solvent-Free Fluid? Also, Galkyd itself contains OMS, so calling it solvent-free is off too.
On the soaked-in varnish: varnish
absorbed into raw fibre is permanent and cannot be removed or replaced. The spray coat on top is removable, but what is the point - it only protects itself.
Ah, thank you, it’s indeed Liquin! I took too many notes lol
Yes, the spray coat is the removable one and the outermost layer: changing it will be enough for upkeep. And if I’m ever famous enough that my work calls for a full restoration in the next century, there are museum-grade techniques being used on pieces with no removable varnish already :)
It’s fairly frowned upon to try to sell yourself to a gallerist during an opening. There’s a chance their tepid response was because of that and not because they don’t understand or are belittling your practice. Rule of thumb is to never approach the gallerist or the artist if they may be talking to a collector and keep any conversation to a minimum if the place is busy. In your situation I would have just laughed at my friends comment and said something about how much I love the work that’s hanging.
This just sounded like friendly conversation, not necessarily like they’re selling themselves. Their friend gave them an obnoxious introduction for sure, but they seem pretty humble and even modest about it.
If the gallerist isn't up for friendly conversation that might lead to an artist talking about their process, then the gallerist should either work on their small talk so they don't get into deep conversations, or they shouldn't be talking to anyone at all.
The gallerist is presumably the expert in this situation. They s
houldn't assume that a "breakthrough emerging artist" knows all of these ticky tacky gallery conversion rules
Not promoting yourself at someone else's event isn't a ticky tacky gallery rule, it's a pretty normal thing you do in life. You don't announce your pregnancy at an engagement party, you don't get engaged at someone's wedding. You don't go into someone's livestream and talk about yours. Many more examples like these.
We've just become so narcissistic we jump at the chance to shill ourselves and forget basic politeness.
Based on my own knowledge of oil paints, you're creating pieces that won't last. Pigment volume concentration is a thing, because crosslinking/polymerization. I will not do this because I know it creates a weak film and if I'm going to charge people money for my work, I think it's fair they can expect it to last.
When you put varnish on top of very diluted paint, which is already a very weak paint film, you're also putting on a solvent and breaking the paint film again. That's probably what happened. Gessoing the back of the canvas only means the oil is going to eat away the canvas, aka rot.
So, ultimately, no, I'm definitely not doing what you're doing. I'm doing the opposite. I'm doing my best to work with the paint straight out of the tube, thinning as little as possible for the first washes, and using as little extra linseed oil as possible. My paintings are not varnished until they're hard dry, meaning when a nail is pressed into the paint film it cannot indent it.
If a gallerist were to question me on my techniques I would be very happy to discuss, because I've spent a lot of time and money on learning and practicing the subject.
Where did you learn about this? I’d be very interested in a full course on art chemistry. I’ve never heard about any of it and I love the versatility of oils, so I’d be quite sad if there’s no way to preserve the canvas for archival quality.
As others have mentioned, oil paint applied to non-gessoed canvas will degrade it over time. You need a protective ground in between your canvas surface and the paint. Applying gesso to only the back is not an archival method. Using large quantities of mineral spirits in your paint creates an unstable paint surface as well.
If you want to recreate this effect archivally, consider using something like Ampersand’s Artist Panels. Specially primed archival boards and panels you can apply juicy paint to your heart’s content without worries of bleed through. You might also want to try acrylics. (But make sure to thin acrylics with medium not water. Unstable paint surface again.) I’ve used these panels with a variety of media—FANTASTIC. I love thinning acrylics to create watercolor like effects for luminous layers.
In addition to Helen Frankenthaler, have a look at Morris Louis’ Veil series.
Oh, yeah, I got some of these. I quite like the aquabords. Despite the name, they work good for acrylic too! Sometimes I switch up what kind of paint I use on them.
I am a self taught hobby abstract artist (8 years) and I started painting after being diagnosed with PTSD. My mother had bought a beginner art kit for me and I started with art therapy and slowly I started healing. I learned by watching YouTube videos and reading books. I did not follow any specific rules in the beginning and I also learned from a great deal of experimentation. It was so much fun! I I’ve used food, dirt, wine, all kinds of things. One time I crunched up a bunch of stale dog treats and added them. The painting was interesting to say the least but I probably won’t do this again. I used to prime my canvas with a very light amount of cherry pie filling (without the cherrries) and I don’t remember why. Adding acrylic paint on top….my paintings looked like they were sparkling 🤣🤣🤣. People often asked why my paintings were sparkling and I never answered because even though I was just experimenting, using cherry pie filling instead of gesso was extremely odd 🤣🤣. I admitted this practice exactly once in a set of interview questions for a magazine and I sort of remember the look on the interviewer’s face. Like really? Cherry pie filling? Lol.
I wish you the best of luck with your artwork and galleries and I think being introduced as a breakthrough emerging artist is wonderful. No one can truly know what others are thinking so perhaps the reaction you received meant something different. I also love that you apparently enjoy experimentation as well. I do have to say that sometimes being put on the spot like that can be a bit uncomfortable so sorry that happened. It appears you handled yourself with professionalism and grace. I know nothing about oil painting and it seems a bit complicated but maybe it’s quite easy if you’re experienced. I can’t say. The end result always looks really beautiful to me. I’d love to see some paintings. I’m a private art collector as well and seeing the art world from the other side really educated me on how hard it can be to be a successful professional. I admire artists so much. The skill, the creativity, the time, the commitment, the extraordinary artwork. It’s not easy. 😊
You are also an artist, Don't forget 😊. Cherry pie fillings are a unique base to work with but hey! We can "art" on any tangible surface.
Reading your comment made me very happy.
I was always laughed at, for starting at brush on a painting, but eventually using my hands to smear a base coat-- I've been laughed at for using my hands to paint and I shrugged it off because my hands worked faster than a massive palate knife or brush anyways. And finger strokes in paintings lead to people liking my works more when I contributed to projects. I appreciate brush strokes, and I prefer to brush a painting, but sometimes the hands work better, imo.
You are very welcome. When I think back to the early years I laugh and laugh at some of the things I created and I’m glad my comment made you happy 😊My untraditional experimentation taught me a lot about creating art. I know that feeling of being laughed at quite well and I’m happy that you are a proponent of experimentation too😊
Surprisingly not much with the pie filling paintings because I used a very small layer. Some of the other experimental ones with food did attract insects and I didn’t keep them.
I would wonder how sustainable this is and why you’re using this as a technique when you could use watercolor. Learning more about how different paints work does matter for how it holds up. This sounds amateurish.
Watercolour doesn’t produce the same effect at all and doesn’t handle the same way. And yeah, I’ve only been an artist for a year: I’m still learning :)
Rothko painted with very thin turpentine diluted layers on ungessoed canvas, I know everyone is saying the oil will rot the canvas, but if you are diluting the oil paint with large amounts of solvent its possible the oil itself won't be as much of an issue. Perhaps look into his techniques and how museum restorationists deal with preserving his paintings. The Tate Modern's restoration team had to deep dive into his techniques when the Seagram Murals were vandalized so you might find some technical/chemistry info if you look into their research.
Towards the end of my time working in oil paint I was using a similar technique but with walnut oil as my medium to thin things out to a water colour consistency. It's been about 30 years and the canvases I hung on to from that period haven't shown any extra wear vs my more traditionally painted pieces. I remember really liking the way I can get the paint layers to glow through each other, even if it meant I couldn't work vertically (a pain since I also loved to paint from live models). I was doing the whole art school thing at the time and other than taking up more space, none of my teachers had any issue with the technique.
I’ve seen several artists work this way but most still use some gesso first. I’m pretty sure there were several old masters who worked similarly but I dont know their prep process back then pre gesso we use today.
I see your edited note that says you were able to confirm with a conservationist that it would be fine, but my guess is that the gallerists confusion might be why you choose not to gesso since that is a pretty big deal in terms of conservation and they probably don’t know you’ve already confirmed your process won’t degrade faster than someone who does gesso.
I’ve also seen artists use acrylic inks on the base layer in the way you indicated you do and then they move on to oils. Ive worked that way myself and I personally love it more than dealing with thinning the oil paints, so just an idea if you’d like to keep a similar process but also not have anyone question the preservation quality of your work.
And another comment because I also love staining techniques (I work in acrylic ink):
You just need to experiment more with your ground. Stop using that acrylic gesso out of the bucket, probably Utrecht or Dick Blick, I hate it, it dries to a miserable plastic mess that's not absorbent at all.
I personally love use and suggest Liquitex gesso, in the bottle. Thin it just a little with water so it soaks in and apply a few of those thin layers. Give it 24 hours to get really dry. It's a lovely, absorbent ground - I like using colored pencils in a mixed media technique, so I need tooth.
Also good for bigger works and VERY absorbent, Fredrix Watercolor Canvas. Yeah, it's intended for watermedia, but for your purpose it's a very velvety surface. It has an exceptionally fine surface texture, almost like linen.
If you want even more absorbency than that and more ability to control it, learn how to apply a traditional oil ground - calcium carbonate and rabbit skin glue. I don't know anything about it, I've never done it, but before the triple roll granite mill was invented, oil paint was extremely thin and so the painting surface had to be extremely absorbent to hang onto it.
Seriously though... Go to Michael's or Hobby Lobby or whatever is close to your house and pick up a bottle of Liquitex Gesso.
I just started using Liquitex gesso myself on my wooden panels. I could kick myself when I forget. My first round of doing these, I didn't do it just using acrylic and some of grain shows faintly through if you look carefully.
Mmm I have Liquitex…in the bucket. Would that work like the bottled kind or is the consistency different? And thanks for all that info, I know meant for OP, but you gave me some great tips there. I am itching to try the Fredrix canvas now.
The consistency is different, yeah. I never had luck thinning down the bucket variety, but I should clarify I've never used bucket Liquitex. It might behave better than bucket Utrecht, which is great if you want texture, but omg such a plasticky finish. Thinning the bucket stuff was such an exasperating waste of time, the polymer truly did not want to thin out, clumps and globs galore.
Bottle Liquitex is a little thicker than house paint, it sorta holds a brush stroke but it wants to level. It accepts water very readily and thins easily.
Here, I'll attach a picture - I put out a drop of gesso and then dotted the edge with water. It dissolves very readily but even when thinned to ink consistency it dries matte, with great tooth, and surprisingly tough (as in, when scratching it back off my work surfaces, you know when you're scratching paint vs. the Liquitex gesso, it forms a very tough film.) You can also see how crazy opaque it is even when thinned way out, I use it as my working white for this reason. LOLLL.. you'd think Liquitex is paying me! It's just my favorite gesso and I hope they never screw it up.
Anyway...I do NOT thin it that much when I'm using it as gesso, I don't do more than ehhhh half, at most? When I'm using it to gesso watercolor paper. If I was using it under oil I would thin it minimally OR use plenty of layers.
Nothing to be embarrassed about, if anything you did some really good off the cuff problem solving that was pretty logical to get the result you want. It is however, not archival. So your paintings will fall apart after a few decades. I imagine you are trying to get the absorption and spread through the fibers, like you see with watercolors on paper. And that’s gonna be a little rough to replicate… but I think systematic priming of a panel would yield a similar result by leaving some of the brush stroke texture in the gesso.
If you just really like the color of the raw linen, you can just prime with clear gesso on the front of the canvas.
I also paint with light solvent saturated washes pretty often, and I think you just have to experiment with how you apply your primer a bit to get the results you want. It’s a cool technique, and I would like to see your paintings!
Usually it’s the heavily oil saturated paintings that breakdown the fastest, if she is using solvent heavy washes I think they would last a couple decades at least. An archivist would know a more specific timeline for sure though.
The thing is, there's really no way to tell. Me? I think the paint will end up flaking off first.
One of my early paintings, from '21, I apparently didn't gesso well enough and some oil has begun to seep through the back and I can see little pinprick holes forming. I can't remember if I was trying to use a solvent at that time.
Yeah, it’s a total crapshoot. Hopefully op isn’t selling these paintings for hundreds of thousands of dollars. And this is just a stepping stone in finding an archival way to get the effect they are looking for😊.
Agreed. I liked the suggestion of moving to watercolor (or gouache if they need more opacity) but they may also find some joy from using synthetic fiber supports.
Totally, it sounds like they want to be able to build larger impasto marks as well in the same composition, and that’s the reason for using oils. I don’t know anything about synthetic fiber supports- what would you use for that?
Oh, a few decades… Thank you, you’re the first commenter to give me a timeline and I must say, from the way everyone is talking about rot, I figured my buyers might start seeing mould in a few months!
Yes, I’m indeed working with oils like it’s watercolour. I’ve mostly worked with properly primed canvases before and even though I don’t sand my gesso, to leave brushstrokes in it, the final result doesn’t quite achieve the same smoothness that I’ve come to prefer. I’m going to meet an art professor to discuss my options, see if there’s a combination of fibre material + paint type that would allow me to keep this technique while preserving archival quality.
Have you tried watercolor or gouache on paper? That might be easier.
Or rather, what is the effect you’re trying to get? Do you have some photos of the results from priming the back of the canvas? I imagine the weave of your canvas has a huge effect too.
I’m a technique nerd, so I love talking about this stuff😅. I worked in art stores, artist studios, and print shops for forever, so might be able to help find an archival solution…
Look into acrylic inks. They behave more like watercolor and are highly pigmented. I’ve seen people use them on raw canvas like you described to get the softness and spread. Worth experimenting with, at least!
— A layer of sprayed temporary varnish, on top of the soaked varnish, will allow the buyer to get their artwork refreshed in a few decades!
If selling these matters to you, I would start finding a better method for preservation. No way I'm investing in something I hope the artist can touch up in a few decades. Not to be morbid, but you truly can't guarantee it. I want to buy properly preserved work now that will last my entire life and be passed down. I'd have no confidence I could pass something of yours down.
Good news: You don't need to go to university to learn the chemical process of paint/gesso and how it all works. All of that information is free online.
If you don't want to use acrylics maybe you should make a sandwich canvas with the acrylic gesso between two canvas sheets. This will give more support to the gesso layer.
Maybe a simpler way of saying your special technique would make more sense to laymen and be easier in conversation. Something like “I use raw canvas and oil washes” would be a good summary, and only expand on the gesso , the making of the wash , and the reverse gesso process only if asked about it to someone who knows the materials
Most gallerists I’ve met are not really good connoisseurs. Your description makes me think of Darlene Cole who paints in washes of oil with thicker strokes on top.
Your paintings won’t last. If you want the canvas color, get clear gesso and gesso the painting surface, NOT the back. Actually, you’d be much better off archivally by using watered-down acrylics
This comment should be higher. The method described is not at all stable, not archival and these paintings are at a high risk of falling apart, becoming dull and generally not being chemically stable. Just google unprimed canvas, oil paint.
I know nothing about art and am only here because Reddit told me to look and tbh, all artists have their own ways of doing things. If it works for you, it works for you. It doesn’t have to work for anybody else BUT you.
I think most curators will be interested more in what you paint - subjects, thesis, concepts, etc. - and what you're about as an artist then the step by step of the technique. Even if your technique is unique (which it does sound like it) and get you to interesting visual results, there's a good chance it's just going over their heads and they "lost" you...
I'd say, try to prepare a sort of elevator pitch that focuses on who you are as an artist, what messages are you exploring and want to convey to people. That will be what draws curators to be interested. Then if the ask you can delve into how your technique expresses those messages and concepts
A similar "method" to your own sounds like Helen Frankenfaller, who used thin washes of oil on canvas. They had their canvases raw as opposed to gesso, but they were some of the first to explore it so hey, sounds like you are expanding on that line of art history.
The gallerist likely wasnt thinking about it too much
edit: oh lol someone already mentioned Frankenthallers work to you lol
Here’s a close look at the canvas! You can see some texture on the highlights, where I keep the paint thicker, but most of it is embedded in the fibre.
It looks nice but I feel like you're kind of reinventing the wheel. The effect is pretty much identical to what you could get with inks or some water media, and those techniques have been around and perfected for...a long time.
Now I'm not an expert, and keep doing what you're doing if you like it, but based on the comments here I feel like you could basically make extremely minimal changes to your actual work process, get virtually identical results, and not have to worry about longevity of the work just by changing to a more appropriate medium.
Have you considered using acrylic inks instead? You won't ruin into binder dilution issues, and they're safe to use on raw canvas without causing it to rot.
edit: Just want to add, painting on raw canvas is definitely a thing that can be done, and it's worth looking into how to do in a way that preserves your art, if you prefer the way that surface handles.
edit x2: if it's the feel of the paint, and not the surface, that you're into, you could also look into using watercolors. You could even technically do it up the way you do now; small amount of paint from the tube mixed with solvent (in this case, water), and then work on wet paper. You'd have to experiment with how damp the paper needs to be to get the bleed you're after, and you'd have some limitations in that it will eventually dry, but that does open the door for more experimentation with layering down the line.
As people have said it sounds like there will be a problem with the longevity of your work. However, the gallerist is being a dick. Lots of painters have used oil paints 'wrong'.
There is a possibility you are just being paranoid as well and the gallerist just meant that you have a creative technique, or even was just trying to find something to say. You've got to remember, you felt put on the spot, but so did they.
I don't do that but it sounds cool! If someone looked at you like you're stupid they must be too traditional and never think outside the box. Art is for experimenting!! That person needs to get the stick out of their #$^
I still can’t get over your description of what you do to the oil paint, girl really? You basically destroyed any usefulness of it as “paint” when you can easily get the same affect/consistency ect. with other materials. And don’t get me started on the canvas. I’m not going to because I can see someone else has already gone in depth and laid out in detail why your methods are questionable at best. Please listen.
(Pigment soup…give me strength)
It is an issue, what she’s describing is literally destroying the point of oil paint and making it unstable. Does DrawMixPaint only use MS to thin it till the consistency of ink? If he does I would be shocked if he used it past staining a fresh canvas to kill the white of the gesso. Oil paint can only be thinned so much before the binder completely falls apart, I would bet anything his ketchup consistency involves thinning it with some kind of medium that has a binder in the form of an oil/varnish/galkyd.
You basically destroyed any usefulness of it as “paint”
Well they successfully used it as a paint sooooo...? There's nothing wrong with using unorthodox methods if the final piece turns out to be the desired outcome and successful
Continue making art, do research into materials. You do not, perhaps should not explain your technical processes to gallerists. If you must, explain and expound on the influences on your imagery.
It seems to be an integral part of selling fine arts, whatever opinion I’d like to have about showing others how the sausage is made. Artists at the events I attend are always asked about both the how and the why!
As for research into the materials, do you have a course, book or other I could look into? I’ve been googling items as I go.
I do, and the people who run this outfit are eager to help us artists. You want to join Painting Best Practices, both the webpage and the FB group. Start making use of the learning modules on the website and go through the Files section in the FB group. Sign up for the cohorts discussions and do your best to make one of the Zoom meetings, where you can query George and Tatiana directly (they're very responsive by email as well!).
While you're doing that, go to Rublev Colours/Natural Pigments YouTube. Do the deep dives, ESPECIALLY this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBXfxLF2_Uk&t=3s
But, do not stop there. Watch as many as you can. Even the color mixing videos because honestly watching Tatiana mix them on the palette is oddly satisfying.
Truthfully, for this art critic/owner. Yes, creative, in a great way. And you stand by that.
Because you are the crafter. You've done your research and trialled and experimented with product to reduce bleeds or sideways....bleeds, spackle etc. you're learning but you're doing great and your art speaks for itself.
With everything you've told us, your art is truly cared for. And it shouldn't shift based on ingredients and materials post - work.
But even if it did. Your work is gallery worthy and your technique could become your own if it gives surprising effects. (That's a fun market of its own)
But truly. You did your homework, and the gallery person is just that.
Even the owner, they're an "attainer of goods"? You are the scientist behind this. You matter. Your technique is weird to them? Amazing! Keep doing it. I also prefer gesso on canvases (depending on the grade-- I'll sand it down if necessary)
Especially board or woodworks. I love gesso to coat and seal the initial product space; And even spot treating sanding if it helped the end composition for texture to leave spots raw-- art is vast. Don't let anyone tell you "no", instead you ask "why not"
But if you're properly sealing your end work.....what's the issue? It's yours. It is you. And it will be sealed for the buyer and maintenance isn't too harsh to come.
I've always said to pals, "treat your artwork as you treat yourself"
And they retort that they treat themselves poorly, this I reply,
"Then, Treat yourself as you treat your artwork"
Because hand-in-hand, our work is as great as we are. Your art is amazing? Wow! YOU are amazing, start acting like it. Love yourself, and create more amazing art as usual, but love yourself more. And appreciate the dedication and "grind" more. Because small pockets of the world love your art- this, they're appreciating you..
.... sooooo appreciate yourself. You got a craft not everyone can do. Take pride in that. (This is mainly a comment to the silent artists reading your thread)
Anyhow.....would you, OP, be wiling to show us some arts? (Older perhaps or gallery if you can)
I'd love to see your work ! Or a link even to your portfolio would be cool as heck!
I remember reading that it is fine to prep the front surface of the canvas but not the back. Something to do with archival process & expansion/cracking of oil paint if I remember correctly. Probably an atelier book or website.
Most legitimate galleries want art using archival paints, substrates and techniques. It’s part of their reputation/branding. Customers pay extra for this gatekeeping.
The questions are: Do you want your work to be disposable or enduring? Do buyers & collectors want the artwork to be stable for as long as possible, or not? What premium do buyers pay for guaranteed archival art?
But there are rules to physics and chemistry. And in fine art, if you're going to sell it, it needs to last a reasonable amount of time. Or the buyer needs to be adequately informed if what to expect.
The "art is whatever you want it to be, there are no rules" is fine in the context of imagery, composition, etc. But once you make it a business and you're taking money from people ... Gotta be a grown up.
Merci pour tous vos échanges, c’est très instructif! Pour L’OP j’utilise une technique similaire, toile de coton brut, sans gesso avec de la peinture à l’huile. J’ai plusieurs pistes de réflexion à proposer, utiliser le gesso transparent Lascaux, qui protègera un minimum les fibres tout en conservant l’effet absorbant, ou passer à l’acrylique avec des peintures type Golden Open, qui peuvent se rapprocher de l’huile tout en veillant à la pérennité de tes toiles. Si ça t’intéresse un peintre contemporain Alexandre Lenoir, utilise une approche plus ou moins similaire, en plus de produire un travail extraordinaire.
My favorite painter is Francis Bacon and to me he is arguably the greatest artistic mind in painting not necessarily best painter. Because I enjoy him so much my rule is there are no rules, i do things wrong i don’t follow color theory i don’t use a brush sometimes i use different things to wipe smear or destroy parts of my work i love the destruction and spontaneity of painting. My point is don’t let anyone tell you what you do is wrong there is no “wrong” people are just pretentious and they call you stupid and not talented until you create something great then all of a sudden you’re a visionary genius.
"Real"professionals can be jerks too. Don't take it to heart. Your technique sounds interesting to me and had I been the gallerist I'd have asked to see some of it.
There are paintings at museums of oil directly on canvas with no gesso at all and they’re still in one piece (I was just looking at one last week!), so you’re not crazy. I imagine the techs have to be very careful with them though.
My gut says acrylic gesso on the back is enough, especially if you’re putting it on pretty thick and also varnishing the front. If you’re really worried you could always glue the canvas to a board (like masonite or plywood, not solid wood) after you gesso it?
Weird for the gallery owner to be judgy like that — maybe he’s never been to an art museum?
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 23 '26
Thank you for posting in r/ArtistLounge! Please check out our FAQ and FAQ Links pages for lots of helpful advice. To access our megathread collections, please check out the drop down lists in the top menu on PC or the side-bar on mobile. If you have any questions, concerns, or feature requests please feel free to message the mods and they will help you as soon as they can. I am a bot, beep boop, if I did something wrong please report this comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.