View Full Version : Portrait or Flesh Tone sets, what's the difference?

06-26-2002, 11:54 AM
I see that many brands have both portrait sets and flesh tone sets and I was wondering what is the difference between these?

Rick R
06-27-2002, 01:37 PM
I have no idea, but I don't want you to feel ignored! :)

Anyway, you might want to go to Dakota Art Pastels' (http://www.dakotapastels.com/) web site and look at their color charts, that might help you figure out if there is a difference.

- Rick

06-27-2002, 04:41 PM
I think they are one and the same and may be used interchangeably.
The other classical sets are the landscape and the assorted ones.
But today you may also come across sets of a specific colours and special sets for dark tones (Like Unison for example).
Schmincke has a set of warm colours called 'Indian Summer' and who knows what awaits us where exotic and silly names are concerned?


06-27-2002, 05:51 PM
I have a set of Rembrandt Flesh Tones that I got on special because I couldn't find their portrait set. It is mostly browns, beiges, ochres, creams, whites and very dark greys. I believe the portrait set has more vibrant colours, and includes blues and greens and various reds.

If I can ever afford it, I will pick up a portrait set sometime. I think that is what I really would have preferred having.


06-27-2002, 06:55 PM
So Flesh tone sets include only flesh tones while portrait sets also include some other colors, right? Got it. Thanks, all!

(And thank you Rick, I was feeling a little ignored for a while. :) )

06-27-2002, 06:59 PM
I just saw your post for "first portrait" in pastels. Gee....you don't need the portrait set, or the flesh tone set...you seem to be doing pretty good without them!

I'm going to post over on that thread as well!