|
Adding to the pastel discussion
Hi all,
This discussion caught my eye because I am in the middle of completing a full color pastel. I am going to play devil's advocate here. I do see the logic in charging less for a pastel portrait. Here are some of my thoughts on why:
1) An oil painting costs more to create. The panel, the primer, brushes, oils, solvents, mediums, etc. are all very costly materials. A drawing can be done on a $10 piece of paper with a $100 set of pastels and a bridge. (easy!)
2) I like to take a break from working with the toxic oil painting materials. I get nervous about the constant exposure to lead, cadmiums, mercury & the fumes from the solvents. I think of a pastel portrait as less detrimental to my health.
3) I don't have to spend days preparing the canvas. I can get a pastel paper ready for drawing within an hour. If it is a disaster...an hour later I am ready to try again.
4) When you pay for an oil painting you are getting a far more permanent portrait. As much as I love pastels and the look of them they are not going to last like an oil painting. The Toulouse- Lautrec & Degas pastels I saw in Paris were all kept behind glass, in climate controlled rooms, with the lights carefully dimmed. They were working very hard to slow their decay, not many people are going to have a protections like that in their home.
4) I find offering a less expensive alternative to oil paintings keeps me busy!!
Lara Cannon
|
Threaded Mode
