PDA

View Full Version : Golden Opens and Atelier Interactives Point by Point


Pages : [1] 2

Nilesh
07-15-2008, 05:45 PM
What are the differences?

When and where might one be preferred over the other?

(A) Golden Opens are ready with slow drying times right out of the tube. Interactives require the addition of Slow Medium to achieve longer drying times.
[[Convenience advantage to Golden Opens, at least for longer-drying-time applications; convenience advantage to Interactives for shorter-drying-time applications (since the use of additives or mediums is unnecessary).]]
[[Learning curve advantage: Goldens seem a bit more intuitive here, for slow drying times at least -- though Interactives are also simple, as long as they are explained well. Slight advantage to Golden Opens??]]

(B) Drying-time versatility: Slower drying times right out of the tube might be more convenient at times; but the Interactives achieve more versatility because they can go from short (with the fast medium) to not-quite-so-short (right out of the tube) to longer and longer (with additions of slow medium).
(Though the Opens can also achieve a similar versatility, but in reverse: one can add faster-drying paints or mediums to speed the drying times, though they may not ever reach the fastest levels without simply switching to the use of fast-drying acrylics alone.)
[[Slight advantage to Interactives?]]

[Side question: Some people actually wish, on occasion, for extra-fast drying times with acrylics. Does anyone know if there are ways of speeding up acrylic drying times using some sort of additive -- something like using a cobalt drier with oil paints to speed up the drying times? (--something other than the usual hair dryers or fans?)]

(C) Re-opening abilities: Interactives can be 're-opened' when dry to the touch -- at first with water alone, later with the Unlocking Formula. The window of opportunity typically lasts for days.

What about Golden Opens? Maybe someone can help out here: As far as I know, they can be re-opened using water at first, then using the Open paints or mediums -- but for how long? And are they basically the same in their re-opening abilities as the Interactives?

How do the two compare in this area?? [I would really like to know this.]

(D) Pigment concentrations: Opens seem to average lower (approximately twenty percent lower, as I understand it) pigment concentrations, when compared with Golden Fluid Acrylics. Interactives seem to have a higher pigment load, though this needs closer confirmation. If so, then
[[The advantage may go to Interactives.]]

(E) Cost: Blick carries both, I'll go check....
[[Advantage: Interactives?]]

*******
Please feel free to post with other points of comparison. One here happens to like both lines, and may even use them together. It isn't necessarily a matter of one or the other -- it can be both. Each of them may have both some weaker and some stronger characteristics.

These point-by-point, head-to-head, side-by-side comparisons can sometimes raise or bring forth useful points. Please feel free to post any observations you may have (or questions, or other points of comparison).

eliza ollin
07-16-2008, 12:17 AM
Hey Nilesh, I hope you get some responses, I love your comparison threads...I definitely wish for a (spray?) that would lock up the paint, even with the regular acrylics sometimes, I know I'll want it with the OPENs...maybe if I wish it enough, they'll develop it!

I'm hoping somebody will also compare OPENs vs. traditional acrylic w/ Liquitex's Palette Wetting Spray, because that seems to have the same benefits, prevents the paint from skinning over, and definitely increases the open time, as well. That stuff might give a person even more control, as you can add a lot less, so it will dry faster...but there might be some benefit OPENs have that I don't know about yet. I did get a small set this weekend, am having fun so far, but the ones I got are *quite* transparent, will have to watch that next time...

JamieWG
07-16-2008, 10:06 AM
(E) Cost: Blick carries both, I'll go check....
[[Advantage: Interactives?]]

Since you cited Blick's prices, I went over there and priced out my own palette. The colors I use in my limited palette came out lower in the OPEN line by about 10%. I converted the 8oz OPEN to ml (236ml) to compare with the 250ml Interactives and adjusted for the 14ml size difference. I suppose it depends on what colors you use; the prices may be more on some and less on others, but I think they're close enough in price for that to not be the guiding factor in selection.

Jamie

Nilesh
07-16-2008, 03:30 PM
Jamie,

I agree, many of the prices seem to be close. As I have looked more closely, though, it does appear, at this point at least, that Interactives have the advantage. I will look more closely at some other colors and quantities; there may be some surprises there.

My habit is to compare burnt sienna prices. The Interactives were lower. Haven't yet compared other colors and quantities.

***
[Here's what I looked at (the tubes of burnt sienna), and the exact prices and conversions:

---Opens, 2oz., 4.37 (40% off list price of 7.29)
---Interactives, 80ml, 4.90 (25% off list price of 6.53)

Converting 80ml to ounces: 80ml x .034oz./ml = 2.72oz.

So the Interactives come in larger (2.72oz.) tubes, and have 2.72/2, or 1.36 times the quantity of paint per tube.

To convert the Golden Opens to same-sized tubes: 1.36 x 2oz. = 2.72oz. (= 80ml).

This would then cost 1.36 x $4.37 = $5.94, or $1.04 more per tube than the Interactives.

If both products came with a 40% discount -- rather than Blick's 40% for the Golden Opens and 25% for Atelier Interactives -- the Interactives would be $3.92 per tube, which is quite a bit less ($2.02 per tube less) than the Opens.

The list prices are more disparate. The Interactives are considerably less.

If both were sold at list price, the Opens would be $7.29 x 1.36 = $9.91 for the same amount of paint as the Interactives (2.72oz., at $6.53), which is $3.38 more.

Haven't yet done the other sizes and pigments, but it does appear to me that the Interactives have the edge in this area.

(Sorry for a bit of friendly disagreement on certain aspects of this point -- and I will double check my figures, and have a look at other colors and quantities; but this is the way it is looking according to my own comparisons so far....)]

eyeburp
07-16-2008, 04:51 PM
I'm anxious to try these.

Nilesh
07-16-2008, 04:51 PM
...I definitely wish for a (spray?) that would lock up the paint, even with the regular acrylics sometimes, I know I'll want it with the OPENs...maybe if I wish it enough, they'll develop it!
I would also like to see this. Maybe someone out there is listening and will respond with a product that would do the job. It would be a great to have this ability.

It would be interesting to know more about the sprays that are used with the Interactives. It seems as if one of them might work in this way, to some extent at least. (Does anyone out there know more about it?)

JamieWG
07-16-2008, 04:58 PM
Nilesh, keep in mind that it is less expensive to pack in larger quantities. Comparing smaller quantities with larger quantities is bound to point this out. I compared the 8oz jars with the 250ml jars because they are so close in size percentagewise---only 14ml difference. I only priced my limited palette---Cadmium Yellow Primrose (Cad Light for the Interactives), Pyrrole Red, Ultramarine Blue (French Ultramarine for the Interactives).

As you say, so much also depends on who has what percentage discount at any given time. List prices don't mean much, since we rarely end up paying list price.

Jamie

Nilesh
07-16-2008, 05:08 PM
(F) Length of blending times (or 'maximum open times'): Some people prefer, at times at least, to have *very* long, leisurely blending times. Oils are able to provide these sorts of blending times -- and there are ways of lengthening the drying times of oils even further, for those who want it.

Acrylics have always been perceived to lag a bit in this area (or more than a bit).

What about Golden Open Acrylics and Chroma Atelier Interactives? Both of them offer substantially longer working times. Which ones offer the longest working times? Can extremely leisurely working times be achieved? If so, how are they achieved?

(--Assuming that good handling characteristics are to be retained for the entire time.)

[[Yet to be determined.]]

(G) Handling characteristics:

Interactives are often described as having a good feel -- more like oils than most acrylics. How do Opens compare?

[[Yet to be determined.]]

(H) Compatibilities with other acrylics:

Golden Opens are compatible, certainly with other acrylics made by Golden, and very probably with acrylics made by most other companies as well.

What about Interactives?

[[Yet to be determined.]]

Nilesh
07-16-2008, 05:24 PM
Jamie,

You are exactly right about the size factor.

However, many people will be buying these tube sizes (2oz. and 80ml) -- they are popular, and that is what is available.

Comparing the larger, more closely matched sizes is probably more fair, in a sense. And these larger sizes are also popular.

In the smaller tubes, it could fairly be said that you are getting more paint for your money with the Interactives.

In the larger sizes -- as you say, it depends to some extent on the colors involved.

If the pigment concentrations are higher in the Interactives, that is also a factor.

***
Yes, it seems that list prices often don't mean what they can appear to mean. And most of us are not paying list prices.

Very few online sources charge list prices. Some local shops do seem to charge list prices.

The rubber meets the road in what the products are actually selling for in a particular case – or what a given person is looking at paying, at a given time, from their available source(s). If another source has a deeper discount than Blick on the Interactives, then they might be a screaming deal. Same with the Goldens.

On average and overall, it still looks to me as if the Interactives usually have the edge, though I am certainly open to seeing it differently.

jennifervs
07-18-2008, 02:22 PM
Hi there!

It's Jennifer, and I'm the Resident Artist at Chroma. Just wanted to chime in on the discussion, and clarify some points.

"Interactives require the addition of Slow Medium to achieve longer drying times. ..." You don't need to use the Slow Medium to achieve a longer drying time on the surface. Simply by using - or withholding - a water sprayer to replace the evaporated moisture will keep Interactive workable. You'll know when to spray when your paint starts to tack up and feels sticky, and add just enough moisture to make your surface slick again. How soon this tacky stage happens depends on the surface, your environment and how thickly you paint. The Slow Medium will increase the working time, but plenty of artists (including me) like working with the paint straight from the tube!



"Drying-time versatility: Slower drying times right out of the tube might be more convenient at times; but the Interactives achieve more versatility because they can go from short (with the fast medium) to not-quite-so-short (right out of the tube) to longer and longer (with additions of slow medium). (Though the Opens can also achieve a similar versatility, but in reverse: one can add faster-drying paints or mediums to speed the drying times, though they may not ever reach the fastest levels without simply switching to the use of fast-drying acrylics alone.)" In my opinion this is the biggest advantage of Interactive - you only need one paint. You can paint like an acrylic painter, using glazing, scumbling, etc, AND you paint slowly with wet-in-wet techniques for soft edges and blending. No need to incorporate another paint.



"Golden Opens are compatible, certainly with other acrylics made by Golden, and very probably with acrylics made by most other companies as well. What about Interactives?" Interactive is compatible with conventional acrylics but the more one combines paints, the more one will lose Interactive's unique blending characteristics. As a general rule, Chroma Inc does not test our mediums with other brands.
If anyone wants more info on Interactive, visit Chroma's Partner Forum here on WC or check our Chroma's website!
:)

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 03:30 PM
Jennifer,

Thanks for the interesting contributions here.

"Interactives require the addition of Slow Medium to achieve longer drying times. ..." You don't need to use the Slow Medium to achieve a longer drying time on the surface. Simply by using - or withholding - a water sprayer to replace the evaporated moisture will keep Interactive workable. You'll know when to spray when your paint starts to tack up and feels sticky, and add just enough moisture to make your surface slick again. How soon this tacky stage happens depends on the surface, your environment and how thickly you paint. The Slow Medium will increase the working time, but plenty of artists (including me) like working with the paint straight from the tube!

I'm glad you clarified this point. How long can the use of water go on? Isn't there a point after which it's better to use the (fluid) slow medium instead (or will water continue to do the job even after a longer time)? And is it used (or can it be used) just like water -- just spraying it on?

Or is the slow medium usually used before the fact -- mixed in with the paints when you know you want them to stay blendable longer, for example?

Or is it used both ways?

(I guess this mainly boils down to the differences between water and the slow medium -- when to use one and when to use the other.)

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 03:43 PM
"Drying-time versatility: Slower drying times right out of the tube might be more convenient at times; but the Interactives achieve more versatility because they can go from short (with the fast medium) to not-quite-so-short (right out of the tube) to longer and longer (with additions of slow medium)...." In my opinion this is the biggest advantage of Interactive - you only need one paint. You can paint like an acrylic painter, using glazing, scumbling, etc, AND you paint slowly with wet-in-wet techniques for soft edges and blending. No need to incorporate another paint.

This does seem like an advantage.

*******
[If Chroma is interested in some feedback, here goes: A real stumbling point, or something many people never get past, is a certain learning-curve hump or difficulty or block. Even people who have seen demonstrations often don't get it (I just spoke with one of them, who works for an art supply retailer and was present at a demonstration, and still just didn't understand the possibilities and use or uses of the slow mediums).

Golden Opens bypass this by already (in effect at least) having something like slow medium incorporated. No learning curve. They dry very slowly, more like oils.

Interactives can do this too, and easily (once you get it); and they can do more as well. This is a real plus.

Within-system versatility is higher.

I know it seems simple to use the slow medium -- and it is: a chimp could probably do it, or a four-year-old at least, or even a three- or two-year-old -- and yet many artists (no offense to artists)[okay, maybe I should just use my own example: I found it a little hard to follow somehow....] find it somewhat difficult to pick up.

...Maybe if some of the special terms or jargon were eliminated?

Maybe make it simpler somehow? It seems like a major stumbling block for many people. I think many more people would use them if they could get past it.

Some of the words used might be causing brain freeze. The word "Interactives" itself initiated a certain block in my mind. "Opens" is a much easier, more intuitive concept (and it uses a simple, direct, easy-to-connect-with, not-too-many-dots-to-follow word) -- people would probably like a shorter, more directly communicative word for this kind of thing.

[There is a fascinating interview with an unusually gifted teacher (who is widely recognized for his very unusual teaching gifts, and for their proven and unusual effectiveness) on youtube.com -- if you search for "Rassias" or "John Rassias," there is an interview in which he describes how he bypasses students' learning blocks. Especially at certain points, where he has observed over many years of teaching that serious learning blocks (that are absolutely unnecessary and get in the way of learning something simple), he finds a way to bypass them.

One example is the subjunctive in French. He just comes at it from another angle, without even using the word "subjunctive" (because the word immediately raises mental hackles and "this is going to be really difficult" blocks in students' minds). He gets them to learn it before they even know what they are learning.]

Some kind of streamlined, enlightened educational psychology seems like it would help.

I still don't quite understand the use of all the mediums, and I'm not retarded -- there are many artists in the same boat....

[Maybe some of Apple's or Microsoft's ideas on user-friendliness, and their ease-of-use and ease-of-learning labs (or some of their empirical testing approaches) would be worth exploring?]

It does seem to me that this lack of intuitiveness or ease of learning (in the way the Interactive paints and mediums are presented and named and described, at this point at least) is a real chink in an otherwise *extremely* good and versatile line.


**************
I'm going to stick it out and get to know them better; but I know of people who never really get to the point of knowing them well enough to enjoy and adopt them; there isn't a sufficient ease of learning for many people. Others, who do learn to use them well and fluently, and to full advantage, tend to really like them and stay with them.

jennifervs
07-18-2008, 04:34 PM
Thanks for your honest feedback! I admit, sometimes simple things can sound confusing, when they really aren't. Even explained, they can get confusing. (Just ask my husband when he's trying to explain cooking to me - I can barely make Jello when I follow his directions!):lol:


Interactive is an acrylic that will stay wet on the surface a tad longer than a traditional acrylic. What is truly unique is the fact that it can be reworked after it is touch dry by spraying with water. If you don't want to blend, just withhold the water. That's it!

***********************************************

Seriously, Interactive is very simple, and from what I hear out there, the most confusion arises when it comes to the mediums.

The mediums, as in any product line, enhance or expand a product's capabilities. So:
Slow Medium: As a "slow" medium, it slows the dry time and will enhance Interactive's ability to be reopened with water. Because it's a medium, it will naturally thin the paint, giving you a more fluid mix.
Fast Medium: As a "fast" medium, this will make Interactive more like a conventional, fast-drying acrylic, ie, drying faster, harder and not able to be reopened with water. Again, because it's a medium, it will naturally thin the paint, giving you a more fluid mix.
Unlocking Formula: Designed to be used with a sprayer, use when water doesn't reopen the paint.

I hope this helps, and once again I appreciate you and all the WC artists taking the time to compare and give their honest feedback on Interactive!

tbezesky
07-18-2008, 04:50 PM
I think that Golden Open is open as long as Interactives can be reactivated without doing anything to the Golden Open. I don't really want Opens to dry any slower than it does. I applied paint at 4:00pm, where it was thick was still slightly tacky the next morning. It stayed juicy for a few hours, depending on how thick it was.
I never sprayed anything. Even the thin dabbed areas of my palette stayed wet.

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 04:52 PM
...it can be reworked after it is touch dry by spraying with water. If you don't want to blend, just withhold the water....

If you want to halt the blendability and fix a layer as it is, is there a spray for that?

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 05:07 PM
I think that Golden Open is open as long as Interactives can be reactivated without doing anything to the Golden Open. I don't really want Opens to dry any slower than it does. I applied paint at 4:00pm, where it was thick was still slightly tacky the next morning. It stayed juicy for a few hours, depending on how thick it was.
I never sprayed anything. Even the thin dabbed areas of my palette stayed wet.

It seems as if there are two different qualities: Extended blendability (like oils, the paints remain blendable longer than standard acrylics, without spraying with water or anything else) and extended re-opening ability (paints can be reactivated or reopened after becoming touch dry).

Both Opens and Interactives can remain blendable longer than standard acrylics, and more like oil paints (Goldens out of the tube, Interactives primarily with addition(s) of slow medium).

Interactives' blendability times can be lengthened, shortened, and fine-tuned by using appropriate amounts of the slow mediums.

Interactives seem to have some advantages in versatility and ability to select the drying times.

Opens seem more intuitive for long blending times right out of the tube, but the blending time is rather fixed at one speed or level -- if you want something faster, you have to go outside the system to add some other, faster-drying acrylic paint or medium; if you want something slower (than what is given right out of the tube), it is not immediately clear how to do that with the Opens, but with the Interactives you just add a slow medium.

***
Re-opening the Opens?

It isn't clear that they are as re-openable as the Interactives, and that the timeframes are the same; and there does not seem to be any equivalent to the Unlocking Formula.

jennifervs
07-18-2008, 05:07 PM
If you want to halt the blendability and fix a layer as it is, is there a spray for that?

Not a spray, per say. You can -
a. let Interactive set up and paint on top;
b. when touch dry, paint a layer of Fast Medium (or even the Binder Medium, which can be used to seal a surface prior to painting) or
c. if you know you want that layer to stay put, just add some Fast Medium from the beginning. For example, when I tone my canvas, I add Fast Medium because I know I'll be painting on top of it.

FYI WC friends, I need to spend some time in my studio getting ready for a show so I'll check again later!:)

Nomad_Ca
07-18-2008, 05:15 PM
Honest feedback..
I use Interactives exclusively.
Even at my slow pace,(which is why I need these slower paints) I can blend my first-on-the canvas paint using my water mister most of my painting day. If I want to reblend them the next day I use the unlocker medium with success.I've only had 1 problem with the unlocking due to my over zealous scrubbing/blending where I scrubbed down to bare canvas which was my fault and was easily corrected. I can't even imagine why I would need my paint open longer than these Interactives can provide.

Happy Interactivator

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 05:24 PM
Jennifer,

Thanks for the clarifications :) , and enjoy the show.

tbezesky
07-18-2008, 05:24 PM
To make Golden Opens dry faster you can mix Standard Acrylic colors with them. I haven't tried it, but JamieWG I know has.

Another characteristic, Golden Opens don't skin over, they dry through out.

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 05:32 PM
Honest feedback..
I use Interactives exclusively.
Even at my slow pace,(which is why I need these slower paints) I can blend my first-on-the canvas paint using my water mister most of my painting day. If I want to reblend them the next day I use the unlocker medium with success.I've only had 1 problem with the unlocking due to my over zealous scrubbing/blending where I scrubbed down to bare canvas which was my fault and was easily corrected. I can't even imagine why I would need my paint open longer than these Interactives can provide.

Happy Interactivator

Glad to hear from happy users/Interactivators, and to hear more about how you use them.

If you add one of the slow mediums, isn't the main advantage that you can continue blending without misting? Don't these mediums make the paint more like oils, in that they don't become touch-dry as fast?

Are there other reasons for using them?
(In addition to what Jennifer has already mentioned -- enhancing the ability to reopen with water.)

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 05:52 PM
(I) Color Selection:

Golden Opens are available in forty colors, Interactives in seventy-five.

[[Advantage: Interactives]]

Bill_E
07-18-2008, 06:18 PM
Not to complicate things, but "advantage / disadvantage" depends almost entirely on the artists needs. A comparative analysis is very helpful and MUCH appreciated, but the judgment lies in the artist who is using them. Seventy-five vs. forty colours doesn't matter. The question is which one has the pigments I like to use, a question I hope to answer for my self in a month or so.

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 06:51 PM
Bill,

I had considered this; I was only referring to an advantage in selection, or a wider selection, not to some kind of overall advantage, or to some other conception of advantage.

(This is also tacitly understood for each one of the points. Overall decisions, evaluations, and priorities will certainly be individual. These points can form one facet of a larger decision process. Someone might just prefer the containers of one or the other, or have some other value or priority that influences the evaluation. These are just some of the possible specific comparisons, some of which might be of use in some way.)

If an artist uses a limited palette, and both lines of paint carry every color the artist uses, then clearly both lines provide the needed colors (as long as the artist does not expand to other colors that may not be available).

There are other issues, such as the qualities of the colors, the exact pigments chosen, the sources of the pigments and the way they are ground and processed, pigment concentrations, etc., etc. -- but I was just looking at the selection, and the Interactives clearly seem to offer a substantially wider range of colors. (I have also heard feedback from artists who have used them, and have good things to say about their colors, both in range and in quality.)

Although the wider range or selection of colors may not matter to some, to other artists it will matter.

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 07:03 PM
I checked another site for more information about the (Interactive) slow mediums. One additional use or advantage of using them is that you don't have to mist as often.

If conditions are such that the user is having to mist too often, to re-open or blend, then the slow mediums will provide relief. The paints stay open longer without the misting.

When using thin layers, or when working in fast-drying conditions (high heat, low humidity, breezes, etc.), frequency of misting might be a chore, and it could be very useful to add some slow medium.

tbezesky
07-18-2008, 07:11 PM
Is there anyone here who uses Interactives on a regular basis, that has tried Golden Opens?
For my purpose coming from an oil bkg. I tried the interactives, had problems with it lifting, getting too sticky. I put them aside.
I tried the Golden Opens, much to my surprise, I was able to use pretty much the same process as I do with oils, and was very happy with the results.
I'm sure it depends on your needs, but this was my experience.

objectivistartist
07-18-2008, 07:14 PM
Offhand, it would seem Golden Opens are what I'd wish to use in seeking to achieve, in acrylics, the slick grading Max Parrish did with his skies, in oils.... then finish the rest with 'the usual suspects'..... especially if am doing work 4'x8', or muralistic size....

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 07:24 PM
Is there anyone here who uses Interactives on a regular basis, that has tried Golden Opens?
For my purpose coming from an oil bkg. I tried the interactives, had problems with it lifting, getting too sticky. I put them aside.
I tried the Golden Opens, much to my surprise, I was able to use pretty much the same process as I do with oils, and was very happy with the results.
I'm sure it depends on your needs, but this was my experience.

I asked Jennifer about the lifting. If the paints are used as directed, it will not occur. (I wish I had a link for you, but I asked her this on wetcanvas.com not too long ago. It may or may not have survived the deletions that occurred when the site was reworked.)

Jennifer, if you have a chance, can you just summarize what to do and what to avoid, to prevent lifting from occurring?

I don't think it is difficult to get around it, you just have to know how.

Same with the stickiness.

*******
[[This day and age (perhaps especially in the U.S., but probably in many other parts of the world as well) seems to have largely moved away from 'complex' instructions, and bothering with learning special instructions and new skills, and reading owners manuals and non-intuitive details. Plug and Play has encroached greatly -- intuitive user interfaces, user friendliness, and all the rest. Studies have shown a clear and steady decline in recent decades, in the percentage of people who read instructions and owners manuals for a wide variety of products.]]

*******
Golden Opens seem to have been formulated to be chimp-proof, which is probably a smart move.

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 07:30 PM
(J) Chimp-proofness:

[[Advantage: Golden Opens]]

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 07:37 PM
Offhand, it would seem Golden Opens are what I'd wish to use in seeking to achieve, in acrylics, the slick grading Max Parrish did with his skies, in oils.... then finish the rest with 'the usual suspects'..... especially if am doing work 4'x8', or muralistic size....

Both products would work, but you might want to add some slow medium to the Interactives (though, as Jennifer has pointed out, you can blend them even when they are touch dry -- just mist with water, and they are blendable again).

A difference might arise if you wanted to freeze a layer so it would not blend any further. The Interactives provide for this in several ways. The Opens do not seem as amenable to this (though it seems as if there are probably ways of doing it, especially using products outside the Open line).

The Interactives would allow you to complete the painting with faster-drying paints within the Interactives line (just paint straight from the tubes, or with the addition of fast medium).

objectivistartist
07-18-2008, 07:37 PM
Golden Opens seem to have been formulated to be chimp-proof, which is probably a smart move. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Nilesh
07-18-2008, 07:45 PM
(K) Outdoor Murals:

Golden Opens are not the best choice for this. Rain and other conditions can be a problem.

I don't know if Interactives are any better, if used right out of the tubes or jars. It would seem that ambient sources of wetness would reactivate the paints, unless fast medium or binder medium were added as protection against this.

With these products (fast medium and binder medium) available within the Interactives product line -- and speaking of using paints only from within each line [rather than adding products outside these product lines (products that are non-Interactives, or non-Opens)],

[[Advantage: Interactives]]

JamieWG
07-19-2008, 09:59 AM
Is there anyone here who uses Interactives on a regular basis, that has tried Golden Opens?

Yes, I have. *raising my hand*

Jamie

eliza ollin
07-19-2008, 11:56 AM
Jamie, I would love to hear your experiences comparing and contrasting your experiences with both of these paints. (I wonder if you already wrote about that when you introduced these to us? have to go check...)

I don't have an oil background, so I'm still on a learning curve, my biggest problem with the OPENs so far is lifting when I glaze (I'm overworking, because I'm used to being able to!), although sometimes lifting can be wonderful, too...but I tell ya, I love love love not having my paints dry out on me! And finally getting to learn to blend, fun...

Nilesh, both Jennifer and Jim Cobb/owner say on the Chroma website that they do NOT recommend them for outdoor use, because they re-open with water and have a longer cure time. They don't address whether they would be more suitable if the fast medium or binder were used...So I'm not convinced they have the advantage on point K--outdoor murals.

link to some very informative FAQs on Chroma website:
http://www.chromaonline.com/chroma/paint_talk/common_interactive_questions

eliza ollin
07-19-2008, 12:25 PM
Here's a link to a post in Jamie's original thread, with some thoughts on her experiences with Interactives and OPENs, it's post #19:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6777372&highlight=interactives#post6777372

(If you have any more to share, Jamie, or anyone else, I'd still LOVE to hear it! And if anyone wants to compare it to just using Liquitex's Palette Spray, I'd love to hear that too...may have to start doing some testing of my own...)

tbezesky
07-19-2008, 12:55 PM
I don't have an oil background, so I'm still on a learning curve, my biggest problem with the OPENs so far is lifting when I glaze (I'm overworking, because I'm used to being able to!), although sometimes lifting can be wonderful, too...but I tell ya, I love love love not having my paints dry out on me! And finally getting to learn to blend, fun...


Eliza, if what you mean by lifting is that it was still tacky, it doesn't skin and cause dry paint to lift. It just needs to dry before glazing like any other paint.

You don't need to glaze, because you have plenty of open time. Opens are designed for wet on wet techniques. Oil techniques apply more so than acrylic techniques. Paintings really look more like oils too.
With my haybails painting I blended most of it wet, putting down base colors and then putting in darks and lights. If there is still some adjustments needed then glaze after there are no tacky areas, thick paint may take overnight.

eliza ollin
07-19-2008, 01:19 PM
Hi Tracy, yes, the paint was still wet, so actually, I *thought* I was doing wet into wet, but instead the paint underneath was just lifting off...I am used to watering down my paint ALOT, so maybe that was the problem...maybe I'll try the OPEN thinner today, I've been avoiding it because I think it adds gloss, which I'm generally not a fan of...

I don't know oil techniques at all, so these are going to be harder for me to learn to manipulate, I think...but I'm excited about getting my edges softer, for instance. That has been a pleasure with OPENs...

I do like glazing, I like the effects, so OPENS may not be the best for that, but I don't want to *only* glaze...I think I'll figure out how to work with them/work them in for what I want to do, it's just going to take some practice...

JamieWG
07-19-2008, 01:32 PM
Jamie, I would love to hear your experiences comparing and contrasting your experiences with both of these paints.

Hi Eliza. You linked to my prior post, and I think that's really all I want to say. Hearing folks review paints without trying them is like reading a review of two restaurants when the critic hasn't even eaten there, and has only looked at the exterior facades and peeked in the windows. You have to taste the food at both to know which you prefer! One may be more established and the other might have a fancier menu, but in the end, it's how the food tastes that will bring you back or not.

In this case, it's like eating Chinese food vs. Italian. Some will prefer the Chinese food and some may want Italian. These two paints are totally different in feel. Not even close. But it isn't something that I can describe. How do you describe a great shrimp dish? You can list the ingredients and what you liked about it, but in the end, the only way to understand what it tastes like or to know if it's your latest favorite dish is to take a bite! And even if it's great, perhaps you prefer your shrimp stir fried instead of parmigiana.

Artists will prefer one over the other, depending on how they like to paint. Chroma Interactives handle and feel like acrylics to me, with some interesting variations and capabilities. Golden OPEN handles and feels more like oils, with some interesting variations and capabilities. I'm an oil painter, so using Golden OPEN is like "coming home" for me, with some new tricks that oils cannot do.

You can compare price, packaging, color choices, and all the things that are listed in this thread, but none of those things either singly or in combination will give you an inkling of how different these products are from one another in practice.

Jamie

tbezesky
07-19-2008, 01:57 PM
Jamie hit it right on the money.
As artists we get used to working in a certain way with our media, and we usually apply our own techniques automatically with a new media. It takes time and practice to test new techniques. If your want your acrylics wet on wet, and to stay wet longer it's a good solution.
We're very fortunate to live in a time when we so many choices and innovations.

Eliza I think it works best straight out of the tube. I think the adding open mediums is best for glazing.

theonoe
07-19-2008, 02:07 PM
<<The pigment load in the Interactives is very high and the color is great.>>

This is one of Jamie's quotes from another thread.

Jamie (or Tracy),

How does the Golden Open brand compare to Interactives as far as the look of the paint on the canvas? (It's sometimes hard to evaluate this aspect on paintings that have been posted on wetcanvas because of the differences in color monitors, etc.) Does one brand of paint have more of an "oil" look than the other? Also, Interactives have less of a plasticky look to them than standard acrylics. (I can confirm this because I have this brand of paint.) Do the Golden Open paints look like regular acrylics once applied, or do they also look less plasticky? (I apologize in advance if you've already answered these questions!)

Theo

eliza ollin
07-19-2008, 03:02 PM
Jamie, agreed, comparisons by people who have actually used both are the true test, that's why I wanted your opinion :). Hearing others' experiences and work-arounds helps me frame my own...

I am still finding the OPENs sticky straight from the tube, and I'm used to painting very thinly, so it's a challenge for me, but I'm sticking with it for a while to see if I can figure them out...each artist is going to have their own reaction based on their own techniques, and I really like hearing them. I'm not looking to find which is right and which is wrong, just some real opinions based on experiences, which techniques/aspects worked for someone and which didn't...

Nomad_Ca
07-19-2008, 04:50 PM
If you add one of the slow mediums, isn't the main advantage that you can continue blending without misting? Don't these mediums make the paint more like oils, in that they don't become touch-dry as fast?

I have become used to doing what the videos from Chroma suggest which include misting my entire canvas at intervals. Doing this often pretty much keeps my entire painting alive and blendable so I've not had any reason to use the slow medium.

jennifervs
07-20-2008, 10:46 PM
If you add one of the slow mediums, isn't the main advantage that you can continue blending without misting? Don't these mediums make the paint more like oils, in that they don't become touch-dry as fast?

Are there other reasons for using them?
(In addition to what Jennifer has already mentioned -- enhancing the ability to reopen with water.)

Many artists use the Slow Mediums for glazing mediums, because they increase the transluency of the paint. The liquid Slow Medium will cut the viscosity of Interactive, and the Thick Slow Medium can be used for impasto glazes. The mediums give artists more time to adjust the glazes, too.

jennifervs
07-20-2008, 11:23 PM
I asked Jennifer about the lifting. If the paints are used as directed, it will not occur. (I wish I had a link for you, but I asked her this on wetcanvas.com not too long ago. It may or may not have survived the deletions that occurred when the site was reworked.)

Jennifer, if you have a chance, can you just summarize what to do and what to avoid, to prevent lifting from occurring?

I don't think it is difficult to get around it, you just have to know how.

Same with the stickiness.



I don't think I got or read the "lifting" question from you, so I am glad you asked again. It's hard to diagnose why something is happening because artists paint in different places, in different ways, on different surfaces, with different brushes, etc.! (Thank Heavens for that!!)

That being said, if by lifting, you mean Interactive reactivates when not intended, then following the suggestions I posted earlier in this thread regarding sealing or "locking" layers may be helpful. Lifting could occur if there's too much medium or water in the paint mix.

Interactive goes through a tender stage as it cures. If you're painting aggressively, and the paint is touch-dry but not cured, you may need to back off that part of the painting a bit like one does with oils.

I use Interactive out of the tube, made more fluid with a bit of slow medium, and I don't encounter this problem. However, I'm trying to reproduce this situation so I can make a video addressing this very concern I will let you know when it's on our website!

The stickiness is a unique stage that happens as Interactive is drying and curing. When you feel your brush drag, but you want to work wet-in-wet, that's the signal to use the water sprayer and spray your painting.

Sketcher
07-21-2008, 05:22 AM
Nilesh,

Another point you should look at is availability.

In Australia, nearly every art shop sells interactives. Yet I can't find golden opens anywhere.

I don't want to order it from overseas, as postage can be very expensive and it can take weeks to arrive.

Sketcher.

JamieWG
07-21-2008, 10:32 AM
............ I can't find golden opens anywhere.

I don't want to order it from overseas, as postage can be very expensive and it can take weeks to arrive.

Sketcher, the product is brand new, and they only just started shipping to stores this month. I called the two art stores where I shop the most and neither one had it, but since my request, one of them has ordered it. (I'm going to call today to find out if it is in stock yet.) Perhaps whatever stores you normally shop at will order it if requests are made.

Jamie

Nilesh
07-21-2008, 06:30 PM
Wow, so many points have come up.

Thanks to all.

***
Hi Jamie and Eliza (and others too, c'mon in... ;)),

Re: Chinese Food. Italian Food. Trying both....

A person can try Interactives and not really get into the swing of them.

In fact, a wide assortment of persons can try Interactives and not really get into the swing of them.

In actual fact, this is what seems to happen.

People lose patience, or do not have the right teacher around (or the right literature, or video) to point out the salient possibilities and versatilities, and to make it simple, plain and clear.

Other people stick it out and find that they really like them.

I spent a few hours painting and experimenting with the Interactives. My initial experience (during the first of these experiments) was not so great. Then, when I tried the fluid slow medium, there was a quantum shift for me.

I don't like stickiness in paints. I like smoothness.

The addition of the slow medium kept the paints' handling much more like oils, in my experience.

Jamie mentions not wanting to learn all the mediums -- up and running right out of the tube is preferred.

I also felt this way at first. But then I said to myself, this isn't really THAT complicated. There are just a few mediums! And they are really easy to use. It only takes a few seconds, once you know what you're doing and why.

There is a certain learning curve, and it appears more difficult than it is for some reason; but it isn't really that bad especially if you are learning as you practice, play, or experiment with them (as opposed to trying to read and memorize it all beforehand, or grasp it all at once from verbal communications, or from watching someone else use them). Taken one at a time -- and there aren't that many -- each one is actually pretty simple and quite manageable to grasp, though it does take some practice, and there is some learning involved.

The stickiness or tackiness can also be altered or remedied with water, and with other mediums.

There are often different options and solutions with Interactives. (I almost wish they were called Versatiles. This is their main appeal for me. They open up a lot of new options, and can be taken in various different directions, and it feels as if you have a new experience of a fuller range of actions available.) There are multiple tools or instruments to make use of. They don't have do be felt as complications -- they can also be felt as a welcomed extension of one's abilities.

It's as if you've got a set of musicians to conduct, rather than just one. It's a richer, cooler, wider-ranging experience for me.

The only catch is, you have to know what you are doing, or you have to learn to get there, or find a way to get there.

***
My brother and I had many meals at a favorite Chinese food restaurant in Silicon Valley. He would always, always, always order the exact same thing [which happened to be tomato beef chow mein, with pan fried noodles].

They had a very large menu at this restaurant, with many unknown and untried (and fascinating, authentically non-American) things on it. I tried a wide range of them over the course of our many trips there.

People are different, and just because someone has tried one or the other product (coming back to these two lines of acrylics) doesn't necessarily mean that they've tried it in the same way that someone else has tried it, or that they have had the same experiences with it, or that they have mastered it, or tasted all that it has to offer.

*******
Although Opens are more like oils right out of the tube (and they are), Interactives can get there too.

Although there is little or no learning curve for this oillike-right-out-of-the-tube handling, there *is* a learning curve (with the Opens as well), for achieving other qualities, and for mastering the full gamut of possibilities. This is true for BOTH paint lines.

*******
Personally, I find myself chafing at, and even rejecting, the American habit [if I can call it that -- there are many other ways of describing it (and "dumbing-down" is one of them)] of not wanting to be "put out" by learning something new, or in order to master something new.

I don't mind learning -- there isn't really that much here to learn or master -- a few new things.

Or, I am getting over it.

Or: I don't want to fall into the present current of tendencies that include rejecting or turning back from a little learning.

I do wish it were made as painless as possible, but I'm willing to go through a learning, even a little pain if necessary, to emerge on the other side with a new mastery of and appreciation for BOTH of these interesting product lines.

Which is coming.

Which I am determined to do.

Nilesh
07-21-2008, 06:49 PM
Eliza,

About the outdoor mural usage: if you include the qualifications, I was only saying -- given the qualifications mentioned at the end -- that they have (with the inclusion of the Fast Medium/Fixer or the Binder Medium) the ability to be more like traditional acrylics.

And that Golden Opens (within the product line) do not have this ability.

And therefore they have this advantage.

[Since both the Fast Medium/Fixer and the Binder Medium make the Interactives (like traditional acrylics) non-resoluble when dry -- non-blendable, or non-liftable with water -- which can be confirmed from various sources, and by personal experiment. I have done this; and I found them to be very much like traditional acrylics, once the Fast Medium/Fixer is added. They do not re-wet and blend once this addition is made; they behave very much like traditional acrylics instead.]

Nilesh
07-21-2008, 08:11 PM
Nilesh,

Another point you should look at is availability.

In Australia, nearly every art shop sells interactives. Yet I can't find golden opens anywhere.

I don't want to order it from overseas, as postage can be very expensive and it can take weeks to arrive.

Sketcher.
Good point.

This will probably vary depending on where a person lives. I live in California, and Interactives are available in my local art supply store; Opens are not.

But there may be some people for whom it is the other way around. And, as Jamie pointed out, they are new, so they should become more available as time goes on.

I wonder if there might some online sources within Australia that carry the Opens, or might carry them in future?

I suppose it could fairly be said that for many people the Interactives are more available at this point, particularly for those buying in person rather than through the mail.

Nilesh
07-21-2008, 08:18 PM
Just wanted to be sure that something said above is not unclearly stated -- when I mentioned "dumbing down" and certain tendencies or American habits, I am not criticizing anyone, or any country, or any product.

I am just tired of not going ahead with something because a little learning is involved. And I'm trying to get away from tendencies, in myself, that lean toward 'everything should be easy and self-evident.' Some things that are worth learning just require or involve some new learning. I'd rather dive in than turn back.

There is sometimes an implicit message that we can't learn (when we are quite capable of learning), and that everything has to be easy; and this sort of thinking seems wrong to me, and counterproductive, or self-limiting. It imposes unnecessary limitations.

tbezesky
07-21-2008, 09:47 PM
The bottom line is what media gets the best painting for you, and how long it takes to make each piece.

Nilesh
07-21-2008, 10:08 PM
(K) Re-opening times:

It appears at this point that Atelier Interactives can be re-opened for a longer period than Golden Opens. And the Unlocking Formula provides for greater versatility in this area (at least when staying within the product lines).

(No blue advantages yet -- will wait until confirmed by experiments.)

Nilesh
07-21-2008, 10:23 PM
(L) Explaining the Why's:

Some people learn and retain things better when the Why's are explained clearly. They not only find out How something is used, they find out Why it is used, and how it works -- not just the external actions and How's, but what is actually going on inside the paints.

I have found that Golden's explanations go into the Why's better, and that I then have a foundation (or a framework of understanding) that relates and ties together the specific techniques, and the uses of the products.

It reminds me of two different lines of thought in teaching organic chemistry. In one, students learn mainly by memorizing. In the other, there is a conscious effort to give understanding and not just memorization. Some of us do much better with the latter. Everything makes sense, and I find that I retain this sort of information better and organize it better, and that I can make more intelligent decisions and usages and choices based on it. I often feel that something is missing unless I understand the Why's. It also helps with the timing of various techniques.

Perhaps I was lucky, but the person with Golden who explained the differences between the thinner and the medium, and when to use one rather than the other, and what was happening inside the paints, and why you use one or the other when you do, etc., gave a very clear understanding of the Why's -- and it all fell together in a way that makes perfect sense for me. (The product information sheet also provides this sort of understanding to some extent.)

So, for people with this sort of learning style, who appreciate the Why's, and find them both valuable and interesting, as well as useful and helpful, and who find this sort of presentation and understanding more with Golden Opens than with Atelier Interactives (as I have),

[[Advantage: Golden Opens]]

SBSandy
07-21-2008, 10:39 PM
Holy Carp -- Sorry, its my new phrase -- Such in-depth analysis about paint, this is exactly why I love this site. BTW, I'm a new contributer, so my responses may be much less sofisticated but I feel the need to respond. I've been an Interactive user for about a year . . . at first not so much, but then I really got the bug and started using them more than my fav (oil pastels). That said, I really love these paints (I do abstract, expressionisms BTW) . . . . I totally know that what moves you, moves you to find the perfect medium, but for me Interactive fills my bill. I never needed to examine the mechanics so specifically, it just worked for me. All that said, I can't wait to hear more about the two and try for myself. I am just amazed that someone would go to such lenghts to examine both. Its totally daunting and refreshing at the same time. Best of creativity to all!

tbezesky
07-22-2008, 12:23 AM
(L) Explaining the Why's:

Some people learn and retain things better when the Why's are explained clearly. They not only find out How something is used, they find out Why it is used, and how it works -- not just the external actions and How's, but what is actually going on inside the paints.

I have found that Golden's explanations go into the Why's better, and that I then have a foundation (or a framework of understanding) that relates and ties together the specific techniques, and the uses of the products.

It reminds me of two different lines of thought in teaching organic chemistry. In one, students learn mainly by memorizing. In the other, there is a conscious effort to give understanding and not just memorization. Some of us do much better with the latter. Everything makes sense, and I find that I retain this sort of information better and organize it better, and that I can make more intelligent decisions and usages and choices based on it. I often feel that something is missing unless I understand the Why's. It also helps with the timing of various techniques.

Perhaps I was lucky, but the person with Golden who explained the differences between the thinner and the medium, and when to use one rather than the other, and what was happening inside the paints, and why you use one or the other when you do, etc., gave a very clear understanding of the Why's -- and it all fell together in a way that makes perfect sense for me. (The product information sheet also provides this sort of understanding to some extent.)

So, for people with this sort of learning style, who appreciate the Why's, and find them both valuable and interesting, as well as useful and helpful, and who find this sort of presentation and understanding more with Golden Opens than with Atelier Interactives (as I have),

[[Advantage: Golden Opens]]

Have you tried both of them? What happens? What are the results of either, for you? This is what matters, a hands on analysis.

Nilesh
07-22-2008, 04:10 PM
(M) Best of Both Worlds:

In the course of all the talk about the desirability of longer drying times, some important points tend to be neglected or forgotten.

One of the prime advantages of acrylics is their considerably shortened drying times:

Artists can work faster.

They can finish a painting in less time. Waiting times between layers can be greatly reduced.

Paintings can be ready to show, or to sell or transfer, in less time.

Problems and mishaps and difficulties encountered in transporting wet paintings are eliminated, along with special equipment and precautions. Space can be saved. Painting on location and while traveling is often simplified.

Final touches can be added at the last minute without the usual reservations or problems.

And so on.

***
Traditional acrylics have real advantages over oils. Many artists have chosen acrylics because of these advantages.

Retaining these advantages is a benefit.

Freedom from the drawbacks or disadvantages of oils is also a benefit.

Sometimes the longer, oil-like drying times are desirable. Other times, they are not at all desirable.

Capturing the best of both worlds (oils and acrylics) is a plus.

Staying within the systems,

[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]

If products from outside the systems are also included,

[[Both are excellent]]

but some advantages may still belong to the Interactives.

WC Lee
07-22-2008, 04:36 PM
and many also switched to oils because of the advantages you speak of.

Nilesh
07-22-2008, 04:37 PM
and many also switched to oils because of the advantages you speak of.

Yes. I want the best of both.

Jerry Bridgers
07-23-2008, 10:12 AM
I have used Liquitex Spray for keeping the pallette moist and slowing the drying time. I have a problem with the spray bottle which stops up very easily after use. if not cleaned immediately after using it will not spray. It is an aggravation to clean the spray head so it will work again. Right now it is shooting a stream, not a spray...apparently my cleaning was inadequate. Because of the aggravation factor, I have not used it very much. I have no idea if this is a defective bottle or a common problem with the product.

I used the Atelier interactive's once. If you wish to see the painting it is on flickr at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bridgeimages/2050936417/

I liked the Atelier paint, but I used it pretty much "out of the tube" with little or no use of the additives. Adding moisture seemed to provide all of the blending that I needed for that painting. I did not notice any thin pigment problems etc.

I also did a test run of the Atelier paints, by painting a red line next to a black line down the length of a board. I could still unlock, and blend, the two lines four months later with the unlocking media. I am planning to switch to the Atelier paints even though they are not locally available in my area.

theonoe
07-24-2008, 02:43 AM
(D) Pigment concentrations: Opens seem to average lower (approximately twenty percent lower, as I understand it) pigment concentrations, when compared with Golden Fluid Acrylics. Interactives seem to have a higher pigment load, though this needs closer confirmation. If so, then
[[The advantage may go to Interactives.]]

This is probably the only thing that I've heard about Golden Open that concerns me. I, too, paint in thin layers, but also want a good pigment load. I already own the Interactives. They are rich in color, blend well and stay open longer than conventional acrylics when they are used with their Slow Medium. I like the idea that G.O. doesn't need mediums to keep it open and blendable but don't think that I want the lower pigment load. I suppose that I would have to try a few tubes to see if there are any disadvantages to this new line.

Theo

JamieWG
07-24-2008, 08:19 AM
(D) Pigment concentrations: Opens seem to average lower (approximately twenty percent lower, as I understand it) pigment concentrations, when compared with Golden Fluid Acrylics. Interactives seem to have a higher pigment load, though this needs closer confirmation. If so, then
[[The advantage may go to Interactives.]]

This is probably the only thing that I've heard about Golden Open that concerns me. I, too, paint in thin layers, but also want a good pigment load. I already own the Interactives. They are rich in color, blend well and stay open longer than conventional acrylics when they are used with their Slow Medium. I like the idea that G.O. doesn't need mediums to keep it open and blendable but don't think that I want the lower pigment load. I suppose that I would have to try a few tubes to see if there are any disadvantages to this new line.

Theo

Theo, I can tell you for sure that, indeed, the pigment load is lower with OPEN. However, in this case I don't find it a disadvantage. In using thin Interactive layers, I find the paint dries too fast for my needs. It also dries on my palette and no amount of spraying and even scrubbing will loosen my mixes and allow me to use them. Having to constantly remix my colors added too much time to the painting process for me.

With OPEN, I just compensate for the pigment load difference by using more paint. As it tacks the paint layer tightens and the pigment load increases dramatically, and I find the resulting pigment load is perfectly ample to meet my needs. The benefit is that with less pigment, the OPEN binder is able to give the paint that longer working time. My palette never dries out, and my mixes remain workable to the end. If they do need a quick spray along the way, they revive immediately. I too am a pigment junkie, but I found I'd rather sacrifice a little of that and just apply the paint thicker, in exchange for a truly long working time. Golden tried a heavier pigment load in the development process, but the sacrifice in working time when adding more pigment was dramatic. Having tried all the different formulations/versions over the past year, I think they found a very good working balance between open time and pigment load.

Jamie

Sketcher
07-24-2008, 08:59 AM
So what would happen if you mixed Golden Open and Atelier interactive together?

Would you get a high pigment loaded paint that feels like oil, has a very slow drying time and remains highly blendable?

Or would it create a powerful explosion that forms a gateway to a parallel universe?

Sketcher

JamieWG
07-24-2008, 09:23 AM
So what would happen if you mixed Golden Open and Atelier interactive together?

Would you get a high pigment loaded paint that feels like oil, has a very slow drying time and remains highly blendable?

Or would it create a powerful explosion that forms a gateway to a parallel universe?

Sketcher

Hahahaha! Well, I'd hope for the gateway to the parallel universe! :D :lol:

Jamie

tbezesky
07-24-2008, 11:33 AM
When we glaze with any acrylics or with Interactives we are adding a medium which lowers the pigment load significantly. Opens are like a ready-mix you use straight out of the tube. When you add mediums to your acrylics they don't loose intensity, the same is true with Opens.
I've tried both. Don't knock it until you try it?

theonoe
07-24-2008, 02:07 PM
<<In using thin Interactive layers, I find the paint dries too fast for my needs. It also dries on my palette and no amount of spraying and even scrubbing will loosen my mixes and allow me to use them. Having to constantly remix my colors added too much time to the painting process for me.>>

Isn't this because you don't mix Interactive's Slow Medium with your paint? Without it, the paint acts like standard acrylics. But, since you don't like having to mess with mediums (and I perfectly understand!), then G.O. is better for you.

<<I too am a pigment junkie, but I found I'd rather sacrifice a little of that and just apply the paint thicker, in exchange for a truly long working time.>>

This is something that I will investigate to see whether I can find a happy medium between pigment load and thickness of layer.

Thanks, Jamie!

theonoe
07-24-2008, 02:16 PM
<<So what would happen if you mixed Golden Open and Atelier interactive together?

Would you get a high pigment loaded paint that feels like oil, has a very slow drying time and remains highly blendable?

Or would it create a powerful explosion that forms a gateway to a parallel universe?

Sketcher>>

This is funny!

Actually, as soon as the Open line was unveiled, I was thinking of trying the two together in an experiment, just to see what would happen!

Theo

theonoe
07-24-2008, 02:28 PM
<<I've tried both. Don't knock it until you try it?>>

Tracy,

I was just expressing a legitimate concern about the lower pigment load. Like Jaime, I'm also a high pigment addict. I have already mentioned that I should try a few tubes to see how it is going to work for me and intend to do so once my local art shop gets them in stock. If they don't work out for how I paint, then I'll stick with the Interactives.
__________________

Nilesh
07-24-2008, 03:17 PM
It seems pretty easy to mix in a little Slow Medium, if needed.

I agree that there is a slight added convenience (at times) when the paints are slow-drying out of the tubes; but how hard is it, really, to add a bit of Slow Medium? It isn't as though it needs to be done very many times, or repeatedly.

It does not seem like a big chore to me; and people who use an airtight palette or container for their paints can always keep a batch going....

I can see the convenience factor, but mixing in some medium just doesn't seem that daunting. And the mixing would not always be necessary; there are times when one would want the faster drying times. With the Opens, faster drying times are not as convenient.

*******
(N) If anyone is open to trying this, the results would be interesting:

Test Opens and Interactives side by side, and monitor the drying times.

One question is: How long does each remain workable (blendable, with good handling, before tacking up and needing further attention to restore good blending characteristics)?

The Interactives would need some Slow Medium added, in the maximum recommended amount in at least one of the tests.

Another question or test might be: How long does each remain re-openable after becoming touch-dry: (1) with water alone, (2) with thinner or water-plus-retarder, (3) with slow medium or liquid medium, (4) with Unlocking Formula?

Another test: how long does the paint stay wet and usable (with good handling) on the palette (with equal-sized paint samples squeezed out on the same palette)?

There are some other experiments that would also be of interest. Maybe if several of us could so these, the results would reveal some interesting differences, equivalencies or similarities, strengths, weaknesses, etc.

theonoe
07-24-2008, 04:31 PM
<<When we glaze with any acrylics or with Interactives we are adding a medium which lowers the pigment load significantly. Opens are like a ready-mix you use straight out of the tube.>>

The acrylic medium that I use thins the paint but doesn't reduce the pigment load (Grumbacher Gel 531--it makes the paint more blendable while maintaining the tube color). Interactive's Slow Medium acts in the same way except that it yields more open time for blending.

Theo

eliza ollin
07-24-2008, 04:50 PM
I have used Liquitex Spray for keeping the pallette moist and slowing the drying time. I have a problem with the spray bottle which stops up very easily after use. if not cleaned immediately after using it will not spray. It is an aggravation to clean the spray head so it will work again. Right now it is shooting a stream, not a spray...apparently my cleaning was inadequate. Because of the aggravation factor, I have not used it very much. I have no idea if this is a defective bottle or a common problem with the product.

Jerry, I do believe this is common, I am now on my third sprayer and still can't get it to work right. I did call them (after ruining sprayer#2), they recommended that after each use I take the entire spray apparatus out, put it in a cup of clean water, and spray from there to thoroughly rinse it out. Otherwise, it's basically acrylic polymer that's just going to dry up in there and it won't work anymore.

If I could get mine to actually spray, I think I'd be in love with the stuff. Right now, I basically have to pour it on the palette, so I don't have enough control. I'd like to use less sometimes, and others, spray it right on the canvas if I want more open time for blending. If I can ever get it to work, this product might be the best option for me.

But I'm not giving up on the OPENs, just yet, either. Today I got some OPEN acrylic medium, it's supposed to lower the viscosity and make them more like fluid acrylics...maybe that will work better than with water, we shall see...

Nilesh
07-24-2008, 05:14 PM
The medium also replenishes lost volatiles. Opens already contain retarder right out of the tubes. They also contain other compounds that evaporate slowly, and keep the paints from drying out so quickly.

Apparently, the water component of the paint is the first to leave (evaporate out). During the first phase of drying -- when water is the predominant loss --spraying with water alone will restore the paint to something close to its original condition.

But the other volatiles are also leaving, although more slowly.

So after a time, the paint will not handle the same (nor respond the same to spraying with water) when replenished with water alone. To restore the composition of the paint (to something close to its original composition), the next of the volatiles needs to be replenished, in addition to the water content.

The thinner is able to do this, because it contains the next-to-leave volatile(s); and spraying with the thinner will restore or replenish the paint during this phase.

Then there is another phase: other volatiles are also leaving the paint; they are even slower to leave, but they do leave after some time, and they too need to be replenished in order to restore the paint.

The medium will do this, because it contains and replenishes not just water, not just water plus retarder (like the thinner, which contains retarder and water), but other, more slowly evaporating agents as well.

So each of these (water, thinner, medium) will replenish the paint, and each is appropriate during its appropriate phase.

Nilesh
07-24-2008, 05:26 PM
(Ooo) You Say Tomato:

I say "Opens" -- you say "OPENs."

Which is it?

The Golden site seems most often to use "OPEN" when discussing this line of paint. However, they also seem to use "GOLDEN" rather than "Golden" when they speak of GOLDEN OPEN Acrylics. So do we have to say "GOLDEN" rather than "Golden"?

Other sites (Blick is among them) just dispense with the foofoo and say "Open" and "Golden" (as in "These mediums were developed specifically for use with Golden Open Acrylics").

So it seems to be either/both.

*******
If I hadn't had a friend who opened her own "atelier," I'm not sure I would feel very at home with the word.

"Chroma Atelier Interactives" is what our Dutch friends call posh.

[[Advantage: This one is a draw]]

*******
(please excuse a brief humorous interlude as we pass the halfway point through the first alphabet)

;)

id-art
07-24-2008, 05:41 PM
See this link: Did a review of OPEN in the newsletter, starting on page 12.
[bad link] see post below.

Nilesh
07-24-2008, 05:45 PM
See this link: Did a review of OPEN in the newsletter, starting on page 12.
http://www.buildart.com/ISAPNEWSLETT...JUN-FINAL2.pdf

Thanks -- would love to read it, but the link isn't working here.

id-art
07-24-2008, 05:59 PM
Link above was no good. Try this...

http://www.isap-usa.com/newsletterpdf/ISAP%20Vol.4,%20No.1,%20June,%202008.pdf

Review of Golden Open acrylics starts on page 12. Compared to Interactive and regular Golden.

eliza ollin
07-24-2008, 06:14 PM
Try this:

http://www.isap-usa.com/newsletterpdf/ISAP%20Vol.4,%20No.1,%20June,%202008.pdf


or you could go to their website, and click on newsletters, it's the June 2008 issue:

http://www.isap-usa.com/ (http://www.isap-usa.com/)

Bob, thanks for posting this link again! I found your review really informative and a joy to read. Fortunately, I read it before I got my OPENs, so I went in already knowing there are difficulties when glazing. That helped temper my frustration a lot...

and Nilesh, (Ooo) lol, I can't believe I'm gonna stoop, but here we go! You crack me up. Clearly what Golden is doing here, open being such a common word, they are *branding* it so we are all clear what is in this new line. Open and OPEN are now two completely separate, but related, entities...if you will refer to the pic in Bob's review on page 12 of the ISAP newsletter :), you can see how they've cap-locked on OPEN and not on "Acrylic Gel" which follows it. I'm going along with it to make things clear when I write about it myself...but, amigo, feel free to rebel and lower-case it just to spite them, I won't call the branding police on you! :)

Nilesh
07-24-2008, 06:51 PM
One of my mentors said that the English language enjoys (more than most) having liberties taken with it.

-- and I suppose it goes both ways! ;)

Nilesh
07-25-2008, 03:09 PM
(P) Cold-weather Painting:

Golden Opens do not freeze as easily as most acrylics. Some open-air (outdoor, plein air, on location) painters-- especially some of the more adventuresome winter ones -- may appreciate being able to paint in colder weather.

Although Opens do not freeze as easily as conventional acrylics, Golden still recommends that they dry at or above 49 degrees F. This is the same minimum temperature recommendation as for most of their other acrylics.

So they might still have an advantage (over conventional acrylics) for those who go out into the cold to paint, and then are able to dry the paintings in a warmer environment.

One outdoor painter comes to mind who has painted with acrylics in all kinds of inclement weather. He built fires to warm and dry them. He also used a portable blowtorch to warm the backs of his panels [also the fronts, though he had to be careful not to overheat the paints (does anyone know what the maximum recommended drying temperatures are?)].

There might be disadvantage here, though: Opens dry much more slowly. It seems that faster-drying acrylics might be an advantage when warm conditions are difficult to maintain.

***
What about Interactives?

How are they in these regards?

[[Yet to be determined]]

Nilesh
07-25-2008, 04:15 PM
Try this...

http://www.isap-usa.com/newsletterpdf/ISAP%20Vol.4,%20No.1,%20June,%202008.pdf

Review of Golden Open acrylics starts on page 12. Compared to Interactive and regular Golden.

Thanks for the many good points in the review.

One thing I would love to see is a similar comparison, with Slow Medium added to the Interactives.

How would they compare with the Opens, in open times (staying-blendable times, without rewetting), and in other ways?

*******
The Interactives were not designed to be particularly slow to dry *without* the Slow Medium. They were designed to retain the ability to go both ways, and more -- slow, slowish, fast, fastish, and in between.

(It puzzles me a bit why so few people seem to pick up on this, but I suppose I didn't either.)

Anyway, it would be very interesting to see how the slowness of the Interactives *in slow mode* compares with the slowness of the Opens (in their default slow mode).

(There is also now a Thick Slow Medium, for the Interactives, which gives additional control over drying times in some cases, and would probably result in much longer drying times, when thicker paint layers are involved.)

awerth
07-25-2008, 06:38 PM
The Interactives were not designed to be particularly slow to dry *without* the Slow Medium. They were designed to retain the ability to go both ways, and more -- slow, slowish, fast, fastish, and in between.

(It puzzles me a bit why so few people seem to pick up on this, but I suppose I didn't either.)

At least when I first tried Interactives a year or so ago, the documentation available online was pretty poor, and so I had certain expectations based upon the advertising and what little was explained on the web site. I think at the time they mentioned using the spray atomizer a lot, but not so much how to use the slow medium. (Using their spray bottle to spritz water onto the painting just didn't work very well most of the time, so I got frustrated...)

It looks like they've changed their online documentation to be a little clearer and reflect the fact that some users may have had some confusion... They write, "[acrylic painters] are more used to a water sprayer or damp brush for keeping the paint on their palette useable [sic] than they are to spraying the painting itself. Everyone who tries Atelier Interactive will be a beginner for a while as they explore its possibilities. It makes sense to use Slow Medium until you develop awareness for the wetness of your painting..."

Adriantmax
07-26-2008, 04:20 AM
I've been using Interactives a couple of months now and here's what I noticed.

The paints are only a little slower drying than regular acrylics out of the tube.

The pigmentation is very rich compared to other acrylics I have tried.

One thing that put me off interactives a bit is that the wet paint is as much as 10% lighter than the dry paint. So when you spray over recently dried paint there an immediate shift. This can be a bit disconcerting as the wet paint is now the same as what you will see when its dry. This is the only negative I have really found with the interactives. Makes the sprayer a vital addition to your tools if you want to stand any chance of matching paint.

The slow medium slows the paint down considerably, and the high pigmentation means that you don't need to mix a lot of paint to maintain the colour.

The unlocking medium smells quite toxic and needs good ventilation. Pretty potent and I can see you getting a headache and getting high otherwise. But it does the job well.

I've only used slow and unlock medium plus water spray so far. The slow medium is vital in 100+ degree weather.

The interactive paints still don't have that amazing almost self illuminating brilliance of oil paints. So they are a lot like any other acrilycs in that you need to use some kind of varnish to get some of the richness back.

I have used the interactives on their own for paintings, and also for underpaintings for oil paintings. I was a bit worried about the oils over interactive acrylics. What I did on a small self portait was slow medium with burnt umber and burnt sienna for thin underpainting. The paint came out quite glossy and fairly oil like.

After a couple of hours and being touch dry I was getting impatient to oil paint so I thought I'd try satin acrylic varnish to lock the paint and painted over with oil an hour later.

So far nothing seems out of the ordinary so fingers crossed it will last. I should probably get the quick medium in place of the satin varnish.

The interactives were much nicer than regular acrylic for underpainting so I hope to use the above technique often.

JamieWG
07-27-2008, 06:36 PM
I can see the convenience factor, but mixing in some medium just doesn't seem that daunting.
It's just not the same. They don't handle the same. Plus, the Interactive paints are skinning over on my palette. I have tried the slow medium. I'm not opposed to using mediums when it is necessary to do so, though I prefer not to have to do that. Also, as far as I'm concerned, spraying mediums is out of the question. One of the reasons I prefer acrylics is so that I don't need to be breathing in chemicals. Aside from working en plein air, I share my studio with three parrots, and birds react very strongly to chemicals. I don't know how everybody else feels about that issue, but I'll only spray water.

And the mixing would not always be necessary; there are times when one would want the faster drying times. With the Opens, faster drying times are not as convenient.
I don't need faster drying times. OPEN tacks up faster than oils, and that's as quick as I need. I understand that others may use different techniques that require the paint to dry faster, but for me it's unnecessary. I think that for most oil painters who work alla prima, Golden OPEN dries plenty fast.



(N) If anyone is open to trying this, the results would be interesting:

...............
There are some other experiments that would also be of interest. Maybe if several of us could so these, the results would reveal some interesting differences, equivalencies or similarities, strengths, weaknesses, etc.

The results might be interesting, but that's all they'd be. They wouldn't tell you which was better for you to paint with. For that, you'd have to actually do some paintings with each. That's the best test of all.

Jamie

Sketcher
07-27-2008, 07:33 PM
One of the reasons I prefer acrylics is so that I don't need to be breathing in chemicals.
Jamie

I agree with Jamie. I love oil paint, but I hate the harsh chemicals. Using harsh chemicals with acrylics seems wrong.

Sketcher.

Adriantmax
07-27-2008, 09:27 PM
I don't think your supposed to spray medium :). Just plain water.

The slow medium isn't in the least bit toxic. Only the unlocking formula that opens up a well dried area is toxic and has noxious fumes.

So you should be fine for most things, Even after a few days you can open the dry paint somewhat but spraying with water and leaving it moist for a few minutes.

The bit that concerns me the most is the colour shift between wet and dry which is much more pronounced than normal acrylics in both value and saturation, which mean you really have to use the water spray to keep your painting damp in order to judge values when mixing colour and comparing recently placed colour with new colour off your pallete

id-art
07-27-2008, 09:52 PM
I think the unlocking medium is alcohol. Lest it smells like it.

JamieWG
07-28-2008, 09:48 AM
I don't think your supposed to spray medium :). Just plain water.

That would make the most sense to me, but the Interactive paints don't stay workable on my palette that way.

Jamie

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 03:24 PM
The Slow Mediums do not need to be sprayed at all. They can be mixed in just as other mediums are mixed in.

The Thick Slow Medium not only doesn't need to be sprayed -- it couldn't (with ordinary sprayers) and probably shouldn't be sprayed.

I've painted with the Interactives, with Slow Medium mixed (not sprayed) in, and the handling was much more like oil paints.

*******
I still haven't seen any side-by-side testing of the Opens and the Interactives, when the Interactives are in slow-drying mode [have Slow Medium(s) mixed in -- ideally both the fluid and the thick slow mediums would be tested],
which is a key comparison.

For some applications (painting outdoors in dry conditions, or in a warm, dry studio, in a dry climate, or with a woodstove going in winter, or just in dry air, breezes, summer days, etc.), it could be useful to know.

Are the drying times very close? Or does one stay wet significantly longer?

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 06:44 PM
(Q) Blendability:

Golden Opens are rather heavy, in my experience. They do not move around as fluently as I prefer.

Interactives, once slow medium is added, are a delight to blend. They just keep blending and blending -- no stiffening or dragging or tacking up. Very smooth. Impressive blending times, and impressive ease of blending.

The Opens seemed more resistant to me.

People vary in their preferences in this area. Some oil painters like smooth, warm-butter-like, easy-to-move paints. Others like stiffer paints.

For those who prefer the former qualities, and in my testing so far,

[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]

***
I believe in keeping an open mind to both paints, though, and in learning to use both of them to their best advantages, and in making the most of their possibilities.

There may be ways of improving the handling of the Opens -- using some medium or additive from within or outside the line, for example.

I will do further painting and experimenting with both.

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 07:00 PM
I think the unlocking medium is alcohol....

Jim Cobb (the inventor of the Interactives) says that it contains rubbing alcohol. Others have said that it is rubbing alcohol.

So it would seem that it is probably either mostly or entirely rubbing alcohol, which is not particularly toxic, especially when used in occasional small doses.

Although reasonably good ventilation is always a good idea, even with acrylics themselves (out of the tube)(Golden also recommends this, both for standard acrylics and for the Opens), there doesn't seem to be anything particularly toxic in the Unlocking Formula. And it is not something that is usually used heavily or frequently -- more like an option to use once in a while when or if needed. For me, good ventilation and natural vapor dissipation (it evaporates and dissipates quickly) solve the issue, with this and with the Opens and their extra added ingredients.

tbezesky
07-28-2008, 07:07 PM
(Q) Blendability:
[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]


Your words carry little weight without seeing what results you actually get, and without being able to see what you are aspiring to do.
So you can go on saying...
[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]
all you want but we can't see really what happens, or how to evaluate your opinion.

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 07:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nilesh
(Q) Blendability:
[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]
Your words carry little weight without seeing what results you actually get, and without being able to see what you are aspiring to do.
So you can go on saying...
[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]
all you want but we can't see really what happens, or how to evaluate your opinion.

You edited rather heavily there, and left out some very important qualifications. ;)

I can always say the same about what you say (its absence of weight), but won't. I think mutual respect, fairness, and friendship are important in these forums.

Many others have shared their experiences here, with or without photography being involved, and without insults or unfriendliness.

Some of the points in this thread are objective and can be fact-checked. Others are more subjective: but even those can be tested rather easily.

[[Most of the points can be confirmed by repeatable experiments that anyone (with access to the paints) can do.]]

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 07:28 PM
So you can go on saying...
[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]
all you want but we can't see really what happens, or how to evaluate your opinion.

I've said many other things besides [[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]], which is also not something I particularly "want," as you put it. If it turns out that way, that is what I will say. If it turns out otherwise, that too is something I will say.


And I described what happens pretty clearly for anyone who can read without bias.

tbezesky
07-28-2008, 08:11 PM
To clarify what I'm trying to say is test the paint until your brushes are worn to a nib, but until you paint pictures with them you really don't know what works best. Example more slippery paint can be better or worse depending on what you do with it.
If my work carries little weight to you thats your business, but it shows what the results are, how they might work for someone else. Results in practice.
I don't have any idea what your trying achieve? Realism? painterly effects? Impasto or glazing?

WC Lee
07-28-2008, 08:25 PM
(Q) Blendability:

Golden Opens are rather heavy, in my experience. They do not move around as fluently as I prefer.

Interactives, once slow medium is added, are a delight to blend. They just keep blending and blending -- no stiffening or dragging or tacking up. Very smooth. Impressive blending times, and impressive ease of blending.

The Opens seemed more resistant to me.

People vary in their preferences in this area. Some oil painters like smooth, warm-butter-like, easy-to-move paints. Others like stiffer paints.

For those who prefer the former qualities, and in my testing so far,

[[Advantage: Atelier Interactives]]

When you add a medium to any paint, of course the handling will be better and easier to blend. If you add a medium to OPENs, it will be easier to handle and blend as well. The way you did this test, its no wonder why Interactive got the advantage.

Honestly, every comparison you made so far, in my eye, you are soooo bias toward OPENs and keep stating Interactives got the advantage even when it is obvious that it doesn't.

OPEN can be used right out of the tube without the need of any mediums to keep it open and workable for a considerable amount of time and in my eye, that is a major advantage and the only one that needs to be consider other than pigment load which Interactives does have more of. Furthermore, OPEN allows me to paint indoors or out in the field without doing all the little things that is needed with interactives to keep the paint on the palette workable.

One thing that you say that keeps bugging me is your statement about adding the slow medium to the blobs of paint on the palette. It isn't so much it is hard to do but why would I want to do it if I don't have to?? And it isn't so much what you said, but how it came across implying that we are all stupid and don't know how to do it and only you have the brains to figure out how to do it.

You keep saying that OPEN takes longer to dry, but think about it, why would GOLDEN put out another line of quick drying acrylic when they already have one? So they can compete with themselves? The whole purpose of OPEN is to create a whole new product that can bridge the gap between Oils and Acrylics without the same characteristics that defines traditional acrylics.

***
I believe in keeping an open mind to both paints, though, and in learning to use both of them to their best advantages, and in making the most of their possibilities.

There may be ways of improving the handling of the Opens -- using some medium or additive from within or outside the line, for example.

I will do further painting and experimenting with both.
After all the stuff you said in this thread, you say that you believe in keeping an open mind???? You been shooting down OPENs from the get-go.

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 08:30 PM
...After all the stuff you said in this thread, you say that you believe in keeping an open mind???? You been shooting down OPENs from the get-go.
No. That may be your impression, but that is your impression. There are actually many places where it is not so at all.

And yes, I am using both and exploring both, and keeping an open mind. And if I find some advantage or advantages to one or the other, I will say so.

tbezesky
07-28-2008, 08:45 PM
The medium that has the advantage is what paints a better picture with the least amount of time and effort, not technical this and that point by point.

For me that's "Advantage Golden Opens."

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 08:46 PM
Honestly, every comparison you made so far, in my eye, you are soooo bias toward OPENs and keep stating Interactives got the advantage even when it is obvious that it doesn't.

OPEN can be used right out of the tube without the need of any mediums to keep it open and workable for a considerable amount of time and in my eye, that is a major advantage and the only one that needs to be consider other than pigment load which Interactives does have more of. Furthermore, OPEN allows me to paint indoors or out in the field without doing all the little things that is needed with interactives to keep the paint on the palette workable....

(1) Biased toward OPENs? I don't think so. I'm using them, and have said many good things about them.

(2) Yes, long drying times straight from the tubes is an advantage for some people (if they want longer drying times), and I have said so [along with mentioning the other side, for a more balanced view -- which is that for shorter drying times they are not so convenient (if you are staying within the product lines, which I have also been mentioning in order to state it more completely and fairly)].

I don't see mixing a little slow medium in with the paints [which would usually be done once, at the beginning (unless you had some left from a former batch...)] as being a great chore.

(3) If Interactives have an advantage here or there, then pointing that out doesn't mean I'm out to get Opens, which I am not at all. It only means I feel free to state what I see. Period.

(4) You mention the use of mediums to change the blending and handling characteristics. If you will notice, I had said the exact same thing in the above and earlier posts.

(5) Other people have mentioned that THEY like the blending characteristics of Opens, but not Interactives (!!)(and I don't see you objecting to this...), even though they were not adding Slow Medium or any other medium, or even water, to the Interactives.

So, don't you think it merely provides something of a balance to do the test the other way around?

******
Honestly, I'm trying to be fair here. I'm trying to look at them from all sides.

And, I mentioned very clearly that the Opens may handle differently with mediums (or additives), which is more than others did when they looked at the comparison without adding anything to the Interactives.

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 08:50 PM
The medium that has the advantage is what paints a better picture with the least amount of time and effort, not technical this and that point by point.

For me that's "Advantage Golden Opens."

I hope we can remain fair and balanced, and not descend into the pit of rooting for sides. ;)

:grouphug:

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 08:51 PM
(That's a group hug, in case it's new to some one or other out there.)

;)

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 09:09 PM
The medium that has the advantage is what paints a better picture with the least amount of time and effort, not technical this and that point by point.

For me that's "Advantage Golden Opens."

Can you fix layers with the Opens, or do they stay wet?

If someone were painting in layers, would it be quicker to use them?

If someone wanted to do a fast-drying underpainting, and add some slower layers for some passages, and then days or even weeks later noticed something (as often happens), and wanted to go back and re-open a section?

There are so many other possibilities.

"Least amount of time and effort" is one standard to go by; and each of these lines would have advantages in those areas for different styles and different paintings and conditions.

There are other points that may be important to people too.

Another example that hasn't yet been covered: Matching a mixed color exactly may pose both time and other difficulties in both lines.

But if the desired colors were available among the thirty-five extra colors (in the Interactives line), it could be faster -- and make for a better painting -- to have the colors already available, and already exactly matched.

And this is a situation that isn't exactly rare; it actually occurs for many painters.

*******
There are so many other points as well.

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 09:13 PM
It might be worth clarifying and keeping it clear that "advantage" doesn't mean overall advantage.

Nowhere have I said that one or the other has an overall advantage.

At this point, it looks to me as if each one has its strengths and weaknesses, advantages and disadvantages -- and each one might be the better choice for the various (and varying) sets of circumstances that actually exist for most specific, individual painters, and for different painters.

tbezesky
07-28-2008, 10:07 PM
This not personal, bluntly and honestly I just wanted to see the work you had done with them in order to understand where your coming from, what your trying to do with them.

There are ways to adjust the drying times of Opens, by mixing traditional acrylics or your favorite traditional acrylics medium. Then you don't have to spray. Spraying doesn't have the same workability as fresh paint. With Opens I don't spray anything not even the palette, the paint stays wet even in the thinnest areas of the palette. As the paint dries on the palette it doesn't skin over it gets thicker, which naturally works better for the latter part of your painting. Concentrating on keeping everything wet is just a distraction.

Having 35 extra colors is not an advantage at all, as long as all the pigments are there and all colors can be mixed. To create color harmony in a painting it is better to have less colors on the palette.

JamieWG
07-28-2008, 10:16 PM
If you're going to be testing the paints with the addition of mediums, remember that you can add all the Golden gloss and matte mediums and gels across their line, as well as all of their other lines of paints---fluid, heavy bodied, matte, high load---- to vary the drying time and viscosity of OPEN paints. Adding traditional mediums and/or paints to OPEN will speed the drying time. Slow drying OPEN mediums are also available, as well as the OPEN Thinner.

It seems to me that comparing the paints, as they are from the tubes, with no additions, in actual painting process, is a valid comparison. One dries quickly and one dries slowly. Both paint brands can benefit on both ends of the quick dry/long dry spectrum with the addition of mediums. To compare the capabilities of one with the addition of several different mediums, with the other with no additions, doesn't give a valid representation, in my opinion. Mediums add versatility to any paints, including traditional acrylics, which can have a substantially extended working time by adding mediums designed for this purpose.

The tech folks at Golden did test the Golden mediums and other paint lines across the brand to be sure that they could be used in combination with the OPEN paints, in order for artists to reap the benefits of their full line of product characteristics. Interactive has marketed their paints to be used with their mediums, but that doesn't mean that OPEN cannot or should not be used with Golden mediums----only that it may be totally unnecessary.

Perhaps I am partially at fault for not making it more clear that OPEN is designed to be used this way along with other Golden products. The fact that my painting style makes it unnecessary for me to take advantage of other additions/mediums/combinations shouldn't preclude others from doing so in order to reap the full benefits of the OPEN line of paints and products. I am a minimalist in practice. Unless I have a reason to add to what I have to lug around to my plein air locations, I'd rather travel lighter. I need a really, really good reason to add to my load or mixing time on location. OPEN just hasn't given me a good enough reason, because I am so satified with the paint right out of the tube. Your mileage may vary, and you have the full line of Golden products at your disposal to add to the wonderful characteristics that OPEN already possesses straight from the tubes.

Jamie

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 10:18 PM
...There are ways to adjust the drying times of Opens, by mixing traditional acrylics or your favorite traditional acrylics medium. Then you don't have to spray. Spraying doesn't have the same workability as fresh paint. With Opens I don't spray anything not even the palette, the paint stays wet even in the thinnest areas of the palette. As the paint dries on the palette it doesn't skin over it gets thicker, which naturally works better for the latter part of your painting. Concentrating on keeping everything wet is just a distraction....
The Interactives can do the same. You can adjust the drying time within the system. You don't have to add anything to get the faster times.

They are simpler for this: the Golden's have a bit of a simplicity advantage for longer times, but the Interactives have the same advantage on the other side.

They don't need to be sprayed. It's an option. They also have the option of staying wet; and they don't skin over.

***
Bye for now. Good cheer to all. :grouphug:

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 10:27 PM
Jamie,

Must reply that I clearly mentioned that the Opens may handle differently and more desirably, for some of us, if mediums or additives were used with them -- and that I would be trying different combinations or experiments.

Others had done the comparison the other way around, without trying the slow mediums with the Interactives, which is unfair, especially since they are faster drying and will naturally tack up more quickly; and some people have rejected Interactives on that basis, and without mentioning possible solutions -- neither of which I have done with the Goldens, even though the issue is the same.

I do not find that the Opens are much to my liking right out of the tubes. Some will, others won't. With the addition of a medium(s) and/or an additive(s), that could change (as I made quite clear); but it does mean (for me, and for others who might prefer these other handling characteristics) that the Opens also need something added, just like the Interactives.

WC Lee
07-28-2008, 10:29 PM
(1) Biased toward OPENs? I don't think so. I'm using them, and have said many good things about them.
A lot of people will say nice things about something they don't like. I never said you didn't say nice things about OPEN but you are heavily favoring Interactives, why, I don't know, maybe you gotten used to using them whereas OPEN is a new product that challenges your knowledge of how you normally use acrylics.

(2) Yes, long drying times straight from the tubes is an advantage for some people (if they want longer drying times), and I have said so [along with mentioning the other side, for a more balanced view -- which is that for shorter drying times they are not so convenient (if you are staying within the product lines, which I have also been mentioning in order to state it more completely and fairly)].
No, longer drying time is an advantage to everyone that uses acrylics, especially in regards to the paint on the palette. No need to mix in a slow medium, no need to use a stay-wet palette, no need to use a sprayer, etc. As for the paint on the painting support, both will pretty much be dry by the next day so it doesn't really matter if it dries in 1 hour or 12 hours. Though it is undesirable when doing glazes or layering and the faster drying time would be better.

I don't see mixing a little slow medium in with the paints [which would usually be done once, at the beginning (unless you had some left from a former batch...)] as being a great chore.
It isn't whether if it difficult or not, the whole point is WHY would I want to or need to do it if I don't have to? Wouldn't it be that much easier if it doesn't need to be done?

(3) If Interactives have an advantage here or there, then pointing that out doesn't mean I'm out to get Opens, which I am not at all. It only means I feel free to state what I see. Period.
If you point out advantages, that is fine but you are not just pointing out advantages. I think I seen one that you said OPEN had the advantage, but immediately following that you also state that it may also be a disadvantage. However, I didn't see those following remarks when you state that Interactives has the advantage.

(4) You mention the use of mediums to change the blending and handling characteristics. If you will notice, I had said the exact same thing in the above and earlier posts. And, I mentioned very clearly that the Opens may handle differently with mediums (or additives), which is more than others did when they looked at the comparison without adding anything to the Interactives.
yes you stated it, but the point is did you do it during the comparison?? No you didn't, you clearly stated that OPEN, straight out of the tube, is hard to handle and blend whereas Interactive MIXED with the slow medium handles and blends better. And therefore, your gave Interactive the advantage. Now if you did both straight out of the tube and both mixed with mediums, then that would be a fair comparison.

(5) Other people have mentioned that THEY like the blending characteristics of Opens, but not Interactives (!!)(and I don't see you objecting to this...), even though they were not adding Slow Medium or any other medium, or even water, to the Interactives.
First off, when others state that, it is their own personal opinion, who am I to object to this? But this thread to me should be impartial and just state the facts and the characteristics of the products rather than stating who got the advantage or disadvantage. What you consider an advantage might be agreed with by some, but on the other hand, it might be consider a disadvantage to others.

So, don't you think it merely provides something of a balance to do the test the other way around?
Usually, when other say it, they usually say it after trying both straight out of the tube so it is a fair simple assessment on their part. But when adding medium to one but not the other, the comparison will, more likely than not, favor the one with the medium.

******
Honestly, I'm trying to be fair here. I'm trying to look at them from all sides.
Perhaps you are really trying to be fair, but it doesn't come across like you are. We all think we are fair, but in all honestly, everyone has some sort of favorism that affects their judgment.

And, I mentioned very clearly that the Opens may handle differently with mediums (or additives), which is more than others did when they looked at the comparison without adding anything to the Interactives.
Read above ...

----

I also like to state that I basically use oils and pastels exclusively, but have tried traditional acrylics in the past and recently tried OPENs. To me OPENs would be a better product to use for an oil painter making the transition to acrylics. And also that OPENs probably would be a better choice to start with for those that are new to acrylics. Both OPEN and Interactive have their strengths and weaknesses and what they are depends on point of view of each individual.

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 10:39 PM
If you are comparing blendability and open times, it makes more sense to use the Interactives in the slow mode, rather than in their (default) faster mode, just as it makes more sense when comparing fast-technique characteristics to use the Opens in their faster modes, rather than their (default) slower mode.

In both cases, it may also be relevant to mention whether it is possible within the system (for some this may matter, for others no -- so it may be worth mentioning, depending on the individual); and it may be relevant to mention the fact that additions to the paints are necessary when this is the case (which has been done wherever the additions are needed). To some this is more of a chore than it is to others; so it can be mentioned, and for those to whom it is an important point it might be useful; the others can go with other points that are more significant to them -- these things will vary from person to person.

Nilesh
07-28-2008, 10:40 PM
Lee,

Will reply later.

Be of good cheer. ;)

tbezesky
07-28-2008, 10:55 PM
Thanks for the info Jamie, I prefer it straight up too. :D

WC Lee brings up a good point, to the oil painter who paints wet into wet they may prefer Opens.
For the Acrylics painter who wants to paint several layers of glazes Interactives may work best.
I think this works well for Eliza. The portrait she did this way was very nice.

Nilesh, perhaps you prefer to paint in glazing layers too? :)

Nilesh
07-29-2008, 04:12 PM
...I think I seen one that you said OPEN had the advantage....

If you look again, you will find that this is simply and plainly false.

There are too many misunderstandings and false claims in your posts for me to reply to them all; most of the points have already been covered; and you seem more interested in arguing than anything else, which ends up being counterproductive -- and is not the intention of this thread. You have also repeatedly ascribed motives to me that are both untrue and unsubstantiated, and your tone in general seems hostile and full of misunderstanding; so I'm just going to minimize this discussion with you and offer the reminder that the guidelines in the forums stress that these discussions should be both friendly and substance-oriented. You clearly misunderstand my motivations, and are projecting things that simply are not there. So please refrain from further personal attacks and false allegations. :)

The purpose of this thread, as stated in the beginning, is to compare the differences and similarities between these two paint lines, and perhaps to learn more about them in the process.

It is intended as a learning-oriented, substance-oriented thread, focusing on these two paint lines -- Golden Open Acrylics (GOAs) and Chroma Atelier Interactives (CAIs). :)

Nilesh
07-29-2008, 04:45 PM
(R) Ease of Adding Mediums:

Some people have discovered that the drying times of GOAs are easily speeded up by simply adding faster-drying mediums or paints. Since GOAs are compatible with many other acrylics, this is a readily available means (for many people) of shortening the drying times, when and as desired.

When it comes to the CAIs, some people seem to find it much less natural somehow to add a medium in order to lengthen or fine-tune the drying times (when and as desired).

In reality, it could -- and in a sense should -- be equally easy and equally natural in both cases.

Some people may have been introduced to GOAs in such a way that the addition of faster-drying mediums or paints is easily accepted, and is seen as a natural part of working with them. This would tend to ease the transition and the usage.

For some reason (not yet fully understood), the similar (basically identical, or even literally identical) addition of mediums to CAIs does not seem to be such an easy-breezy thing for some. It is seen as somehow more complex or unnatural (that is the impression I have gotten from several people, both here on these forums and in person). Somehow it seems more complicated, or less clear, or harder to accept and transition into in a simple and accepting way.

But it is really exactly the same thing, just in the other direction; and it can be seen as equally natural and equally easy-breezy, and equally an integral part of, and a basic tool in, using the line.

[[Advantage: Seems like an Equality]]

WC Lee
07-29-2008, 06:10 PM
Believe what you will .. if you believe I am attacking you or my accusations are unfounded, so be it, I don't care one way or the other .. but my responses are from an individual that only used acrylics on very rare occasions and I am simply saying that your so called point to point comparison gives the impression that you are bias toward OPENs from a reader's point of view. Whether you want to believe it or not, that is entirely up to you.

jm-art
07-29-2008, 08:07 PM
I’m not one to post, but I’ve been an active “viewer” of WC for a very long time. I have found many useful, interesting, and educational threads that have helped me in my journey. After reading the latest on this thread, I got up the courage to join so that I could post my paintings and my personal thoughts on Interactive and Golden Open. I have been creating art with Interactive since it was first introduced back in 2005, and had no trouble at all grasping the concept that one tube of paint permitted me to work either slow or fast. It’s very versatile and will do what you want it to do if you replace (or withhold) the water with either your brush or sprayer. The mediums do enhance its capabilities.

Recently, I did what was suggested and painted the same still life under the same conditions with both the paints.

I painted with Golden Open vs. Interactive in my studio on July 27. The conditions were the same for each painting: temperature of about 80-85 F, no air conditioning (just fans) and humidity of about 50%. I worked on unprimed acrylic paper from Strathmore and used a disposable palette.

The Open colors were Titanium White, Bone Black, Hansa Yellow Light, Pyrrole Red, Ultramarine Blue, Yellow Ochre and Burnt Sienna. Working with just paint (no mediums) I found Open to be very wet and runny from the tube. The quarter-sized dollops stayed wet on my disposable palette the hour I painted; there was no need to spray the palette with water as I’ve always done with acrylics. I noted that the paints had a low pigment load (compared to what I expect from Golden), even though I had a range of colors from transparent to opaque. I had to use lots of Titanium White to get a higher opacity. The paint itself felt stringy, and it reminded me of when I use to add a boatload of retarder to my Golden paint to get it to stay wet longer.

On the surface, the paint stayed workable for the entire hour. I was able to use sgrafitto techniques easily throughout the session. It started to tack up within an hour, but using a bright brush I was able to blend in new paint easily. The next morning, my painting was touch dry, but spraying with just water I was able to reactivate a layer and blend when I rubbed with my finger.

The biggest drawbacks were the saturation and that that I could not overpaint. I had made a “mistake” earlier in my painting and wanted to overpaint it, but could not during that session. Later, I couldn’t glaze to add more depth to the work. As you can see from the painting I posted, the colors are not popping at all. The biggest advantage was that Open did stay wet on the palette, and I did not need to remix colors. When I checked the morning of 7/28, my palette was still fairly usable. A shot of water and a bit of a stir got it going.

For the Interactive palette, I used Titanium White, Carbon Black, Arylamide Yellow Light, Pyrrole Red, French Ultramarine Blue, Yellow Ochre and Burnt Sienna. To keep the comparisons even as possible, I didn’t incorporate any mediums at all. The first thing I noticed was the two paints feel different. Open feels slippery, but Interactive feels juicy, for lack of a better word. I had to use the water spray to keep the paint workable on the surface because it tacked up somewhat quickly in my warm studio, but it worked well enough to allow me to blend wet-in-wet. I also had to keep spraying my palette to keep the paint from skinning over.

The Interactive colors are much more vibrant than Open. I appreciated that I could overpaint a “mistake” and glaze in the same session, and I could soften and blend, too when I wanted. I was not able to reopen touch-dry light washes, but was able to reactive heavier areas and do sgrafitto effects. When I tried reopening the Interactive painting with water the next day, I got some movement, but no blending when I rubbed with my finger this is where you use the unlock formula, but I didn’t want to use any mediums to see what results I would get). When I checked the morning of 7/28, the paint on the palette was not usable, as it had formed a skin.

To summarize, Open’s sole advantage over Interactive was that the paint stayed wet on my palette, so I didn’t need to remix colors. This, of course, saves paint, but if one doesn’t like the feel of the paint to begin with, is this advantage really worth it? Simply spraying my Interactive palette with water periodically kept the disposable palette useable for my purposes; simply spraying my surface kept the paint workable for wet-in-wet blending. The key advantages of Interactive were that I could work fast or slow during the session, it felt nicer under the brush and the colors are highly pigmented. I'm sure if I used my sta-wet palette, the Interactive palette would still be active. So for me, Interactive is the better paint because it offers more opportunities to explore the boundaries of acrylic painting. I also only need to buy one tube of paint to do fast or slow techniques – not two as you do with the Golden system. What it feels like to me is that the Open is just an acrylic with an extremely high amount of retarder mixed in with it. Again, why not just buy regular Golden and the retarder instead of two tubes of paint. At any rate, this is just my humble opinion.

awerth
07-30-2008, 12:29 AM
jm-art,

Thanks for the detailed observations. I suspect that, as with so many art materials, which paint is "better" will come down to each artist's personal style and preferences. And anyway, it's always fun to experiment with new product! I had a few comments on your notes...

I worked on unprimed acrylic paper from Strathmore and used a disposable palette.

For both paints, I wonder if you would see noticeably different handling characteristics if you sealed or primed the paper first, since paper absorbs so much moisture out of the paint and could change the drying characteristics.


Simply spraying my Interactive palette with water periodically kept the disposable palette usable for my purposes; simply spraying my surface kept the paint workable for wet-in-wet blending.
...
I'm sure if I used my sta-wet palette, the Interactive palette would still be active.

One problem I struggled with when I tried out Interactives about a year ago was that they seemed to dry so much darker than when you apply them, especially if you've added any water to the paints (or have a wet brush). I didn't notice that with the Opens (though I've only done one painting so far with them; I'm about to start a portrait that should be more demanding than the still life...).

By the way, when I used a sta-wet palette with Interactives, they melted very quickly. The next day the paints were very watery, loose puddles that were pretty unusable because the high water content made the colors apply so much lighter than when they dry. So if you try that, perhaps go light on the water in the sponge/paper towels.

One thing that you could try, if you need to keep your Interactive paints workable longer, is to put a folded paper towel soaked with some water into the palette before sealing it up for the night. I found that with the Opens, at least, this prevented any skinning over of the blobs of paint in the palette (I don't know if it was necessary; my theory was just that it would keep the humidity level up in the palette).

-Andrew

tbezesky
07-30-2008, 02:36 AM
I would just like to just add a thought, we all have bias. :)

Here are my generalizations and biases: :D

Each of us has, I am assuming, developed our own unique techniques, they become natural to us, we proceed through our methods almost without thinking. We learn to fly in auto pilot.
When we approach a new medium we naturally try to work the medium the same way as the old.
If your an acrylics painter you naturally think about how wet your painting and palette are because if you don't your screwed, ;) so Interactives seems easy compared to what you've done in the past.

If you are an oil painter you don't think about how wet your painting or palette is, it's just wet, and if it's the next day it's dry. This is basically how Opens are so we are comfortable and continue in auto pilot. :D And no it would not be the same to replace Opens with Traditional acrylics and retarder, that would only keep it wet for a few more minutes at best vs. hours. So, Oil painters usually aren't concerned with controling drying times very precisely.

Since the acrylics painter has limited time to blend, naturally glazing is good approach for representational work. So, you want to control drying times, because you want to proceed to the next layer. The oil painter is not waiting for the paint to dry, most put down all of their colors and values down before it dries for the whole painting, a given area, or a layer.

For the acrylics painter, Interactives may make glazing easier being able to extend and control drying times, to the oil painter it's not juicy long enough.
We want it fresh not just wet. For the oil painter, virtually the same techniques work with Opens that we use in impasto or Alla-prima, or assorted wet on wet techniques. It feels like oil, Acrylics and retarder doesn't even come close, because you have to glaze to get those blends. Opens are the first Acrylic paint to live up to the claim, "It feels like oil." You can't trick us we know what it feels like. Naturally we are very excited.

If you are an acrylic painter and you try Opens, you might start by glazing with them. If you do they will look diluted. Opens are like they already have the medium in them thats what keeps them wet. If your palette has aged a few days you will have a more impasto like consistency, which is handy at the end of a painting. I am getting some great impasto paint on my week old palette right now, that I am going to use for the end of my next painting.

If an artist is not adapted to a medium, he may more easily, and with a more open mind adopt the methods for either Interactives or Opens, the rest of us are biased. :D

WC Lee
07-30-2008, 03:43 AM
jm_art: I like the way you conducted your comparison, everything the same for each. I wonder if different supports would make any difference, I tried OPEN on gesso illustration board and boy did it suck the wetness right out of the paint, each layer of paint I put down was literally dry to the touch within a minute of layering it down. I hate to imagine what it will do to the interactives.

tbezesky: I do agree that we all have some bias within us whether we acknowledge it or not, that includes everything in life. Coming from oils, I still find OPENs hard to get accustomed to, even with its longer drying time, I just can't seem to be able to push the paint around like I can with oils. But you're right, those who are accustomed to oils would not be vary of the wetness of the paint on the palette.

JamieWG
07-30-2008, 11:48 AM
To summarize, Open’s sole advantage over Interactive was that the paint stayed wet on my palette, so I didn’t need to remix colors.

This says it all for me. When I'm out plein air painting, I don't have time to remix colors constantly. I mix my base colors once, and I count on that paint to remain fresh and workable for the entire time I paint. I continue remixing from those first mixes and my pure color piles as I work a painting from start to finish. That's what oil paints do for me that acrylics, until OPEN came along, have not been able to achieve. OPEN enabled me to make the leap from oils to acrylics, and I'd tried everything from retarding mediums with traditional acrylics, to Interactives.

To get over the pigment load hump (which was a big one for me too with OPEN), I found I needed to go to the stronger pigments in the OPEN line. The Cadmium Yellow Primrose and Cadmium Yellow Medium do far better jobs than the Hansa Yellow "Opaque", which I find to be way too weak and transparent. It's unfortunate that they weren't able to include those in the trial sets because of the hazard labeling issues. I also like the Pyrrole red (and the cad reds) and the Ultramarine. Those are really the base of my palette, and give me the pigment load I need. I add other colors to a "basic three" plus white as needed.

Working wet into wet isn't a problem for me, and I find that I can overpaint easily within the same session with OPEN. I guess if you only paint for an hour, you may not reap the full overpainting advantages. It doesn't dry quickly---that's the point! ;) Depending on the conditions, a half hour may not be enough time for the paint to start to tack up. Usually the paint sets up enough by the time I'm ready to overpaint. In fact, the paint on my palette thickens a bit by then too, and I find the combination is a perfect complement to my process.

I also found that I need to use a softer brush with OPEN, and apply the paint thickly. Bristle and hard brushes scratched right through to the surface, and made it hard for me to get enough paint down to get the color and coverage that I wanted. I guess the "staying wet and workable" issue was so huge for me that I found ways to use the paint to get the results I wanted. Now I find I can paint with them faster than oils because of the overpainting possibilities as they tack up, and I get a better result. In the end, that was what mattered to me.

By the way, I find that "mistakes" made early in the process can just be wiped off with a wet brush right down to the support, and then repainted.

Jamie

JamieWG
07-30-2008, 11:52 AM
Coming from oils, I still find OPENs hard to get accustomed to, even with its longer drying time, I just can't seem to be able to push the paint around like I can with oils. But you're right, those who are accustomed to oils would not be vary of the wetness of the paint on the palette.

You're right that OPEN does not handle like oils in many ways. The Golden company has been very careful never to refer to these paints as an oils substitute for that reason. Those coming from an oils background will find many similar elements, and lots of techniques that work with both paints, but they will be taken by surprise if they expect the paints to feel and behave just like oils. I agree with you that there is a learning curve with regard to the inability to push the paints around like oils. On the other hand, we gain the ability to overpaint within the same session. I felt a little sacrifice in the movement of the paint was worthwhile for what I was able to gain in other areas where OPEN outperforms oils. It took some adjusting for sure. Now when I go back to oils, I'm a bit frustrated that I cannot reap those other benefits of OPEN!

Jamie

theonoe
07-30-2008, 12:55 PM
<<To get over the pigment load hump (which was a big one for me too with OPEN), I found I needed to go to the stronger pigments in the OPEN line. The Cadmium Yellow Primrose and Cadmium Yellow Medium do far better jobs than the Hansa Yellow "Opaque", which I find to be way too weak and transparent. It's unfortunate that they weren't able to include those in the trial sets because of the hazard labeling issues. I also like the Pyrrole red (and the cad reds) and the Ultramarine. Those are really the base of my palette, and give me the pigment load I need. I add other colors to a "basic three" plus white as needed.>>

Thanks for mentioning the colors that you think have the best pigment load! These are the ones that I would want to try once I get my Open paints.

Theo

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 03:07 PM
I painted with Golden Open vs. Interactive in my studio on July 27. The conditions were the same for each painting: temperature of about 80-85 F, no air conditioning (just fans) and humidity of about 50%. I worked on unprimed acrylic paper from Strathmore and used a disposable palette....

Great. Thanks so much for posting. Very few people have really tried both very thoroughly at all. Often, people will try Interactives only briefly, and never really get to know them. I've met people who expected long drying times out of the tube, and didn't even know about either of the two Slow Mediums -- and some of them didn't understand the different and extremely useful techniques for re-opening as needed, to blend or re-work specific areas. So they just give up, without getting a better feel for them, and without really knowing what they can do.

*******
Your approach of trying both right out of the tubes is one fair test. There are other fair tests as well, though.

I would love to see the results if you admitted the use of Slow Medium -- it is also a fair test, since many people would have this available, and would use it, and since it is an integral part of the system. It is actually -- in a sense -- an even fairer test, if you want to compare the open times and blending times (and wet-on-the-palette times) for both paints when they are both used in the same mode, the long-open mode.

***
Another fair test would be to try both of them in the same, shorter-drying-time modes. For this test, the Opens would need something added (like a fast-drying medium), and the Interactives could be left as they are out of the tube. Or, a third (and also fair) additional test painting could be made in which the Interactives have Fast Medium/Fixer added, since that too is a part of the system, and part of its set of modes of use.

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 03:21 PM
You also mention the vibrancy of the Interactives. I too have noticed that the Opens seem more muted. I'm not saying this is good or bad, just different -- it would be more or less desirable depending on various factors.

What I am wondering is why. Why this muted or toned-down effect? What is causing it?

tbezesky
07-30-2008, 03:33 PM
It doesn't matter how they test against one another, they are apples and oranges. They are designed for different approaches to painting.
We've gone over and over all the points.
This is very unproductive, we've already decided what we want to use. Take your media of choice stop testing and start painting pictures. I am painting small quickies until I am adapted, and know better how to proceed.
Both products have great potential, let's see what we can create. :thumbsup:
See you later, I am going to go paint!

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 03:45 PM
It may not matter to you -- but you can't speak for me or for everyone, and it may very well matter to someone else. Each of us is free; not all of us are so decided; there is much left to see and learn; and there are many other points that haven't yet been touched, but will be.

I've learned a lot from these comparisons, and will continue learning from them. Thank you for your suggestions, but I will continue with my thread.

(If it's all right with you, of course. ;))

:grouphug: :grouphug: :grouphug:

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 05:06 PM
...One problem I struggled with when I tried out Interactives about a year ago was that they seemed to dry so much darker than when you apply them, especially if you've added any water to the paints (or have a wet brush). I didn't notice that with the Opens (though I've only done one painting so far with them; I'm about to start a portrait that should be more demanding than the still life...).

By the way, when I used a sta-wet palette with Interactives, they melted very quickly. The next day the paints were very watery, loose puddles that were pretty unusable because the high water content made the colors apply so much lighter than when they dry. So if you try that, perhaps go light on the water in the sponge/paper towels.

One thing that you could try, if you need to keep your Interactive paints workable longer, is to put a folded paper towel soaked with some water into the palette before sealing it up for the night. I found that with the Opens, at least, this prevented any skinning over of the blobs of paint in the palette (I don't know if it was necessary; my theory was just that it would keep the humidity level up in the palette).

-Andrew

Thanks for some good points.

The color shift is something I would like to understand better. Jennifer (or anyone else with Chroma, or anyone else who might know more about this), if you are there, could you let us know more about why it happens, and especially how to manage it? It does not seem particularly severe to me, but it does happen in some cases, and it would be good to know how best to deal with it skillfully.

I do know that it can be useful at times to spray an area, in order to match a color.

It might be better to use mediums rather than water to minimize the shifts?

Are there other ways of minimizing it?

Are there alternatives to spraying with water that might help in some circumstances?

***
It would also be interesting to compare the Opens and their color shifts, and how water and other additions affect them.

***
On the liquefaction issue: I had the exact same experience with the Opens. They melted into a very liquid puddle inside a stay-wet or airtight (Mijello) palette, overnight.

Adriantmax
07-30-2008, 05:39 PM
The colour shift I noticed was wet v's dry paint. All acrylics darken and loose their brilliance when dry. It's one of the things that immediately seperate them from oils (in my mind).

But with the interactives the colourshift is a bit stranger. If you have just been painting and the paint is getting tacky and you spray it, the wet portions are a good 10% lighter and slowly darken again as they dry.

This is a problem if your trying to match colours and blend because there is quite a lot of difference between the wet colour on your palette and brush and the drying colour on your canvas. (you can of course spray the canvas lightly first so it lightens to the wet value).

I'm doing an oil painting at the moment, otherwise I'd take a photograph to show you what I mean.

If they could keep a more consistent value between wet and dry paint, the interactives would be so much better.

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 06:49 PM
...This is very unproductive, we've already decided what we want to use....

Not at all, and we haven't.

And this is the single most productive thread I have participated in (or read) on wetcanvas.com, or any other art website. It is also the best learning experience I've had.

It is also the single most useful and relevant thread (apart from a few hostile and counterproductive comments and posts), both for what I am doing now and for what I will be doing in future.

***
So please desist with the negative comments and criticisms of this thread. I am enjoying it and learning from it, and others are too. If you have something constructive to bring to the table, it is most welcomed. But not these sorts of negativities. I don't criticize your threads, or try to tell you what to do or not to do on them -- so please be courteous enough to extend the consideration.

You have an obvious and admitted choice of Golden Opens; others of us are not in that position. Some are more experienced with or oriented around Interactives; others (like me) are exploring both mediums in more detail -- and learning many things in the process. So please be a little more respectful of this thread and its purpose and spirit, and of the other people here who do not share your orientation.

Also, I have used both paint lines and find them very similar in a number of ways, sharing many similar capabilities that are not shared by any other paints. I will continue to uncover more similarities and differences, and look forward to the journey, and to the learning and understanding and new skills that will come with it.

The purpose of this thread, which I started, is to compare the two point by point, and to learn more about both of them. That is the purpose. It is not a "criticize this thread" thread. So please be a little more considerate and less spoiling to the true spirit of the thread.

***************
Genuine thanks and appreciation go out to all those who have graciously brought, and continue to bring, their knowledge, understanding, goodwill and positive contributions to the thread.

I've been learning a lot, and am grateful for all these participations and contributions. They are most welcomed.

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 06:51 PM
Adriantmax,

Thanks for that. Good to hear of your experiences.

I wonder what Chroma has to say about this?

jm-art
07-30-2008, 07:26 PM
awerth - For the most part I always prime my support; however, I just wanted to "see" how both Interactive and Open would react on an unprimed surface. I do believe the ability for the paints to remain workable will extend on a primed surface, and I will try this too with both Interactive and Open. As far as the Interactive colors shifting darker when dry, I had not really taken notice to this . . . maybe it's only certain colors that do that? I mist my palette and mist my painting so it's always wet when blending. I will take closer note to this next time around.

wclee - Never worked on that type of surface . . . but I have found the Interactives do stay wet longer when you are working on a primed surface to prevent wicking out the back. You might want to try coating the surface with slow or adding the slow to the Interactives. Just a thought.

jamiewg - I like oils too for plein air and didn't find the Open to handle at all like an oil . . . but I'm going to try it again. I find oils to be much more viscous. I don't like the stringiness and the dullness of the Open colors so it doesn't matter how long it stays wet. I do have opaque and transparent Open colors, and they just don't have the vibrancy that I prefer.

nilesh - I really suspect that if you add a boatload of gel retarder and/or retarder to the regular Golden acrylics, you'll come out with much the same thing as the Open. I've done this before when painting plein air, and it seems the consistency and muted tones are very much the same as other artists are finding with Open. From a chemical standpoint, there is only so many things you can do to acrylic to keep it that wet that long. I'm going to try to get some other paintings completed and will post when I get a chance . . . possibly slow medium mixed in to see if the wetness is similar to Open . . . to quote you: in the slow mode.

tbezesky - In a real sense, if the discussion revolved around acrylics vs. oils that would be comparing apples to oranges. They are both acrylic paints. As I have said in my first posting, I have found WC to be educational and informative and wouldn't want these types of discussions to be stopped. From an artistic standpoint, I don't grasp all the negativity. It's only sharing information, and for me it is inspiring. And now I'm going to take your suggestion, and go paint!

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 07:32 PM
Great post. Thanks for all of it.

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 07:43 PM
(S) Quality of Customer Support and Artist Support:

I've experienced both, and this is what I have found so far: Both of them are unusually good. They both have very useful and informative websites. They have their own forums, and opportunities for Q&A. They both have educational and instructional videos. There are online newsletters. There are also archives to learn from. Interactives have more posts, and more variety, and more information at this point; but Opens are relatively new, and more will become available with time.

I have also had experience with some other companies. They've been less -- in some cases considerably and notably and drastically less -- responsive and helpful. They just aren't there for you. (I'm not saying all of them are like that; but some are.) It makes a difference. It's a very good thing to be able to get a question answered, or a clarification, or help with something when needed.

[[Both companies have been exemplary.]]

tbezesky
07-30-2008, 07:48 PM
jm-art, Nilesh - I have learned so much from Wet Canvas too, many things I wouldn't have learned otherwise, and from technical topics such as these.
It's just that we had gone in circles for a bit not getting anywhere. Recent post have been more informative.

It doesn't look muted unless you put too much medium in them. Check out our paintings in Experiments with Golden Opens. I think they are best straight out of the tube, maybe they are that way because of what keeps them wet? Like medium built in?

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 08:02 PM
Here's one of the best, most informative presentations on Interactives that I've come across so far. There are many good tips embedded and sprinkled throughout, and it covers a wide spectrum of points. It's amazing how much gets covered (sometimes in one sentence) in a short informal presentation.

I've watched it several times now, and learn something new each time [I find that there are little things that tend to get overlooked or missed sometimes...; and then they turn out to be very very useful "little" things ;)]:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0v4VpogUyDU


***
(There are also some good, informative Golden videos. I'll track those down and post as well.)

JamieWG
07-30-2008, 08:15 PM
jamiewg - I like oils too for plein air and didn't find the Open to handle at all like an oil . . . but I'm going to try it again. I find oils to be much more viscous. I don't like the stringiness and the dullness of the Open colors so it doesn't matter how long it stays wet. I do have opaque and transparent Open colors, and they just don't have the vibrancy that I prefer.

JM, I found the dullness happened only if I didn't put down enough paint, and perhaps that's what happened in your test. (???) I lay down easily two-three times the amount of paint that I do in oils to get the workability and color I like. I find the color actually intensifies as it dries. When I look at my paintings the next day, they always appear more vibrant than they did when I painted them, whereas with oils they sink in a little and get 'softer' looking as they dry, and lose a value on each end of the spectrum. It is partly that quality that makes me prefer them over oils. I use soft brushes with OPEN and slather it on. LOL Since it tacks up, you don't have to worry about it becoming a mucky mess like oils might do with such thick underlayers. I agree with you that it doesn't feel like oils. But it doesn't feel like acrylics either. I find it very difficult to describe the experience of painting with them, because it's not really like anything else I can point to and say, "It's like that."

Also, if you mist your palette and painting, you're further diluting the paint. With OPEN, that may not be a good idea!

Jamie

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 08:28 PM
Here's a fun Golden Opens video that I just came across,

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CCoy0sngGmk

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 08:46 PM
I'm trying to find a Golden Open Acrylics video that I saw recently. It's similar to this one (there is a lot of overlap)

http://www.goldenpaints.com/company/news/2008/open.php

but it is different -- more informative for artists, or more instructional. It has some other clips in it. There is a presentation by an artist who explains how she has painted with them, and she shows the paintings. And there is more. Maybe someone can help out here. (If I find it, I'll post it. If someone else finds it, please feel free to post.)

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 08:50 PM
Found it:

http://www.goldenpaints.com/video/openDEMOVIDEO.php

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 09:00 PM
Jamie,

Thanks for those experiences, and for others as well -- they speak to the points, and are quite on-topic, and are appreciated.

Nilesh
07-30-2008, 09:59 PM
These also contain some good tips -- the first one has tips on using a water sprayer (the artist is, I believe, the inventor of Interactives, Jim Cobb; and he has some pointers that are new to me),

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lICrB34Hx-U

and the second one is more general (and also contains some new tips),

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGWTdjC6psM&NR=1

[Those were both great presentations, Jennifer. Thank you.]

tbezesky
07-30-2008, 10:12 PM
I did a little youtube demo of a still life in Golden Opens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ki6Lxh1bnU

To contribute on the other side there is also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFtQyJM5E_Q

jennifervs
07-31-2008, 12:20 PM
Hi artists - lots of good information on here!

Awerth, Adriantmax & Nilesh - you wanted to know how to address the color shift with Interactive. Acrylics darken when they dry because the binding agent in the paint is white, but dries clear. In some brands this shift is much more apparent, and if you use lots of light values and white in your palette, you will really notice this. With Interactive, Chroma has made this shift as minimal as possible. Some painters will recognize this shift, but others won't even notice it. I think it depends on the artist's palette and their experience.

Adriantmax, you said that the wet paint is 10% lighter than the dry paint, and that makes it difficult to match colors. I guess it depends how you look at it. Trying to match dry paint to wet can be difficult, but I think it's much easier with Interactive than with regular acrylics. The way I work, when I want to match colors, I deliberately spray my painting so the colors return to their “wet” look. Then I match the wet color on the painting to wet paint on my palette. I know that the colors will dry on my painting darker – but they will dry the same color. I hope that makes sense!

There’s more information addressing tonal change in the Interactive Users' Guide. I’ve posted a link in our Partner Forum:
http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?t=509935

If you like your painting but think the colors are dull, I'd try varnishing it.
Varnishing not only protects the painting, but it evens out the sheen and brings the colors out again.

Nilesh – your tests with mediums are a good idea. Although some will say I’ll be biased, I am a painter (that’s one of the reasons I work for a paint manufacturer!) I’m going to do some painting-to-painting comparisons of my own, like plein air, portraits, oils, etc, and will be posting the results over the next few weeks in Chroma’s Partner Forum. I’ll alert this thread, too, when they are up. I definitely encourage others to do the same!

To reiterate what others have said, painting is such a personal experience, that ultimately what's "better" is going to be personal. But we all can learn from others' experiences and opinions, which is why threads like this are helpful.

Monet or Manet? Degas or de Kooning? Red wine, white wine, beer? Depends on my mood, the food, the view, the day....

jm-art
07-31-2008, 07:44 PM
jennifervs - I've watched your videos on Interactive. Will you be posting any new ones soon? Looking forward to your comparisons with Interactive and Open, and comparing notes.

Nilesh
08-04-2008, 07:53 PM
(T) Blending Abilities, Across the Spectrum of Drying-time Modes:

Both paints can be used across a wide spectrum of drying times. Both companies mention this prominently in their product descriptions, videos, and other presentations, and on their websites.

Both lines of paint are often compared (by the companies themselves, and by the users of both) with other acrylics -- conventional acrylics that do not share their capabilities of long blending times and slow drying times. These are among the primary capabilities or features that are presented both by Chroma and by Golden. Both companies clearly make these points and comparisons. And they are among the foremost reasons why people are interested in (and actually go ahead with) buying them, trying them, and using them.

Both companies also mention prominently that the paints can be used for a variety of drying times, or in a variety of drying-time modes. Versatility of drying time is one of their main features. They can be used for slow painting as well as faster painting, and in between. When the slowest of the available drying times are wanted by an artist, they are possible. When you want to speed things up a bit, you can; you also have the option of speeding them up some more. When you want to slow them down, you also have that option available to you. The videos from both companies (which are linked above) clearly describe and present this.

At first, both lines seemed more or less identical in the intermediate drying-time modes. If you add a little bit of a faster-drying [non-Open] medium to the Golden Opens, you speed them up a little; and if you simply add more medium, you speed them up even more.... With the Interactives, you just add a bit of Slow Medium to slow them down a bit, and if you add a bit more you can slow them down even more.

Both products work as claimed. Both of them can be used in a variety of drying-time modes.

And it looks at first like an equivalence: It's simple to achieve these drying times with the addition of a medium, and they both cover a wide range of slow, intermediate, and faster drying times.

But when I experimented with them, it turned out that there was a significant difference.

Since both companies clearly and prominently mention enhanced blending abilities (compared with other acrylics), these abilities are seen (by the companies) as having some real significance to artists.

So this difference in blending abilities seems reasonably significant.

The difference is this:

As you add faster mediums to the Opens, you decrease or lose your abilities to re-open and blend. This is also mentioned by the company; but, in addition, it is easy to experiment with it as well.

As you add Slow Medium to the Interactives, you fully retain your abilities to re-open and blend. This too is easy to confirm while painting with them; it is also mentioned by Chroma in their product information.

*******
This covers the intermediate range of the drying-time spectrum. What about the faster drying times?

I'll leave those experiments for another day.

**************
A couple of notes: When things are compared, the comparisons do not always come out equal. When Golden compares Opens with conventional acrylics, they do not come out equal in every way. When Chroma compares Interactives to conventional acrylics, they do not come out exactly equal.

It is in the nature of these comparisons, and all of us make use of comparisons in life. When two cameras are compared on a website devoted to serious photographers, and they are compared on a number of points, they do not often come out equal. Camera X42 may have twenty-three advantages, while Camera X43 has thirty-four advantages. There are all sorts of possibilities that can and do occur. They rarely come out equal.

One is not against either line of paint: one is *for* both lines of paint. And one is sure that both of them will disclose more stronger points and weaker points, as time and experiments go on.

Camera X42 devotees don't really need to get all puffy and upset because their darling X42 has some disadvantages in comparison with another camera; it's just the way things are. It's just the way things happen when things are openly compared point by point.

If, on the other hand, a person likes both equally, or simply feels no special attachment, tie, bond, or commitment to EITHER of them, then why get upset over a simple comparison?

(Or if bananas have more potassium than apples or oranges, or oranges have more Vitamin C than bananas, or apples have more of something else than either of them, and someone finds that useful, why get upset about it? It's the nature of these things, they can be compared and often are; and people make use of these sorts of comparisons for all kinds of things.)

These comparisons often disclose things that otherwise remain unclear or out of view.

Many such comparisons can be found, and found widely -- on various websites on the internet, and elsewhere, for cameras and other products.

And for paints as well.

asnowfall
08-05-2008, 01:56 AM
In the latest blog Golden rep writes about pigment strength and retarder.
http://www.goldenpaints.com/blog/2008/paint-ideas/some-transparency-about-open/

jm-art
08-05-2008, 10:28 PM
Bravo Nilesh! You are certainly well versed, and come across competent and serious. I love reading your posts!

eliza ollin
08-05-2008, 10:31 PM
Thanks for that link to the blog Ramesh, hadn't seen that before, I plan on following it now

and thanks to you too, Nilesh! I'm still here enjoying the thread...

Nilesh
08-06-2008, 02:59 PM
Thanks. Appreciate the kind words.

Nilesh
08-06-2008, 03:04 PM
(U) Good News for Open Users:

People at Golden listen to artists. And they often improve their products over time. The Opens are new product line -- this is the first generation to hit the market. The product line will probably not be entirely static over time; it will probably not remain unchanged and unimproved over time. They are a progressive or progress-oriented company.

Chroma also seems to be such a company.

They have clearly indicated that they are paying attention to feedback; and they have also clearly indicated that they are paying attention to what is being said on these forums, right here on wetcanvas.

So the feedback they are receiving here (including feedback -- perhaps even especially feedback -- about areas of possible improvement) may very well make available new possibilities and improvements for all of us, and have benefits in the future developments of the product line.

Opens are evolutionary rather than static; and honest feedback and findings by artists are valued by the company. And it seems to me that they should be valued by us as well.

(V) Good News for Interactive Users:

The same principle applies to the Interactives -- which are also evolving.

(W) Good News Overall:

Progress rather than fossilization seems to be the order of the day.

Nilesh
08-06-2008, 05:48 PM
(X) Provisional Wish Lists for Improvements:

How would you like to see both product lines improved?

At this point, a couple of areas where I would like to see improvement would be:

For the Opens: An additional medium that would preserve the ability to re-open and blend when using the paints in intermediate and faster drying-time modes (and also eliminate the need to go outside the product line to achieve faster drying times).

For the Interactives: One or more solutions to the issue of inconvenience (for some people) of adding Slow Medium, when using the paints in intermediate and longer drying-time modes.


*********************
The former seems to be a matter for laboratory development. How about the latter -- how could it be provided? Here are the approaches I’ve considered:

The most practical and simple is to make the process easier (or, for some people, even easier than it already is). This might be achieved in several ways, which could be used alone or in concert.

One is to show people processes that make it easier -- some people imagine that they have to do a lot of stirring with a palette knife or some other separate tool, in order to mix in the Slow Medium. It can be done with the brush, though – the same brush that is being used at the time for painting.

Some people imagine that a long stirring time is called for. This could be shown as unnecessary…. There are various ways of making it a simpler and more streamlined process for new users, and of helping them to arrive at an easy familiarity with the process, or arrive at an ease of usage.

Another possibility is to have (small) dispensers for the Slow Medium that are even easier and quicker to use, or more pleasant have a much better ‘feel’ when squeezed and used, than most of the other ones that are in use, and also give you better and surer control over exact rates, streams, or drops].

There is also another approach, which could be used in addition; and it seems like a very good one:

Some oil painters make use of little jars that clip on to their palettes (‘palette cups’), like these:

http://www.dickblick.com/zz030/19/ (http://www.dickblick.com/zz030/19/)

There are various sorts of metal ones as well. Richard Schmid and many other experienced oil painters use them.

Here are some examples,

http://www.utrechtart.com/dsp_view_products.cfm?classID=1214&subclassID=121412

And there is this variation on the idea,
http://www.dickblick.com/zz030/51/ (http://www.dickblick.com/zz030/51/)

These or some other variation on them could be a very useful approach -- so users can just dip a brush whenever they need to add a bit of medium. The jars are right there for them, next to their paints, easy to dip into whenever needed; and it really does make the use of mediums easier, faster, and simpler.

Some similar arrangement could be made for the Slow Medium. It could be made (or supplied) by Chroma, to go with the Interactive system -- or one of the existing cup systems could be used.



*******
A “remora tube” might be another possibility. Two-part epoxies are often sold in dispensers that make mixing easier. A smaller, specially designed tube could be made to piggyback onto existing tubes of Interactives, to allow both the paint and the medium to be dispensed together at the same time.

In the process of looking into this idea, it was more or less rejected as rather impractical in the end -- but I mention it because even such flawed ideas can sometimes spark something else. And it could be made to work.

Another possibility is to include the slow medium [I]inside existing tubes. There could be a way of including or excluding the slow medium (along with the paint stream coming out of the tube) as the tube is squeezed. An extreme form of this idea would include a regulator to allow for selective amounts to be added. This could be as complex as a dial (which would probably be too complex and expensive), or as simple as “squeeze here” – an internal version of the remora, something like an internal bladder, which would only activate when squeezed or pressed directly.

This is probably also not practical, but may be still contribute something to the process of finding some solution(s).

***
This inconvenience comes up again and again. Evidently some people find it to be more inconvenient than others, which probably shouldn’t be dismissed or ignored. It seems like an area for real potential improvement.

There might be some additional approaches too.

A companion line would be another approach -- for users who want premixed paints.

It does seem as if the palette cups would be a step in the right direction.

jm-art
08-07-2008, 08:27 AM
Just a thought as I continue my studies with Golden Open . . . it seems to me that these two paints are really different from one another. Golden Open was designed to stay wet - all the time. Interactive was designed as an acrylic that provides an artist with the advantage of arcylic wet-in-wet techniques if they choose to continue to work that way. But, if an artist wants to do wet-over-dry, they certainly can. Does anyone else have a thought on this? As I continue to work with both of these acrylics, I really am finding true differences. Yesterday, when I was painting by the river, it came to me that these two companies each really have a unique paint! It's just really all in the way you want to work.

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 03:50 PM
Yes, the Opens seem more oriented to wet techniques -- keeping it all wet. It isn't so easy to mix wet-on-wet techniques and wet-on-dry techniques with them as it is with Interactives.

They're made to stay wet.

They stay wet for a fairly long time, out of the tube.

That seems to be their natural mode, though it can be changed.

Interactives seem to be easier to work with in a variety of techniques within the same painting, and to work in alternations of techniques -- you aren't so committed to one approach; and it's easy to change or mix techniques.

Opens seem to made more with staying wet (and perhaps also simplicity) at the fore.

Interactives seem to be made more with versatility and having optional directions at the fore.

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 04:33 PM
Chroma had a prior line of acrylics (Chroma Atelier) that was liked by many artists. When Chroma Atelier Interactives were formulated and introduced by the company, they replaced the older line of acrylics. Chroma did not want their existing customers/artists who were using the older line of acrylics to be forced to use something terribly different or foreign. Some artists like having the capabilities provided by acrylics. So the Interactives were meant to retain those capabilities, and add new ones, and to be an easy transition.

Compared with Opens, they are more like conventional acrylics in some ways, and can be used as conventional acrylics are used, but with additional capabilities on top of that.

I was just reading what Jim Cobb, the inventor of Interactives, has to say on their website. Here's some of it,

Atelier Interactive is the first real tried and tested advance on acrylic artists’ paints since they were first developed back in the 1960s. This revolutionary acrylic does not form a skin permitting the paint to be rehydrated even after it has become touch dry.
The real starting point of this trend was 2003 when I invented Atelier Interactive, which was subsequently put on the market in 2005 and Chroma holds a patent pending on its formulation.
In 2005, Atelier Interactive replaced Chroma’s ordinary artists’ acrylic called Atelier in Australia and New Zealand. It was designed as an improvement to ordinary acrylics, not a complete departure from them. Atelier Interactive is not a slow drying paint; it is a universal use paint, which the artist can easily control so that it dries either quickly or slowly.
Atelier Interactive performs well as a fast drying paint, and many people choose acrylics because they are fast drying, yet when a fast drying paint “controls you”, and won’t let you extend the open working time when you need more time to finish what you are doing, it is a great advantage to be able to use the “slow” side of Atelier Interactive’s “character”.
Because it is easy to use either fast or slow, there are fast painters who use the slow side occasionally, and there are slow painters who set themselves up for progressive slow painting sessions with extensive blending, like with oils, except that at the end of a session the painting can be dried out rapidly if necessary.
By simply adding water to your paint brush or spraying your canvas, you can extend your wet blending time indefinitely during a painting session. The next day, or even days after, if you choose to continue with your wet-in-wet blending, simply use our Unlocking Formula.

***
It seems to me that both Opens and Interactives can be used in various modes; but their natural modes are a bit different.

Still, I don't see the natural mode of Interactives as 'fast' in the exact same sense as standard acrylics are 'fast.' Although Interactives do touch-dry fairly fast (out of the tube), isn't the same as standard acrylics because you can re-open them, and re-work them, while with standard acrylics that option is closed off.

***
[Jennifer, there is one part of what he says that puzzles me just a bit: "...slow painting sessions with extensive blending, like with oils, except that at the end of a session the painting can be dried out rapidly if necessary...." He may be talking about using the paints with Slow Medium, it seems to me; but the last part -- about drying out rapidly at the end of a session if necessary -- I'm not entirely sure about. It sounds like an attractive addition to their versatility, and an option or possibility I would like to have available; but I'm not quite sure what it is he is suggesting here. Or maybe he is not talking about using them with Slow Medium, but re-opening with water? Then the fast drying would naturally be available....]

JamieWG
08-07-2008, 04:40 PM
Some oil painters make use of little jars that clip on to their palettes (‘palette cups’), like these:

http://www.dickblick.com/zz030/19/ (http://www.dickblick.com/zz030/19/)

There are various sorts of metal ones as well. Richard Schmid and many other experienced oil painters use them.

I use these with Golden OPEN when plein air painting, just like I would do with turp and/or medium for oil painting. I can do two 8x10" plein air paintings with only an ounce of water, using about a half ounce in each palette cup. One is for rinsing dirty brushes (wiped first); the other is for more thorough cleaning after cleaning in cup #1, or for thinning paint slightly. When I'm done, I wipe out whatever tiny bit of water remains in the cups with the rest of the paper towel I was using to wipe my brushes. That way, I'm not even leaving any waste water on location, and am only using an ounce or so of my drinking water.

Jamie

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 04:47 PM
Yesterday, when I was painting by the river, it came to me that these two companies each really have a unique paint!...

It seems to me that both are unusual and unique, and that both of them are real contributions to acrylic painting, and substantially widen acrylic painters' possibilities.

***
There is an additional option that hasn't been touched on yet. Maybe the alphabet will end in some kind of fusion reaction....

[Fusion reactions often seem better than fission reactions, and more powerful.]

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 04:51 PM
I use these with Golden OPEN when plein air painting, just like I would do with turp and/or medium for oil painting. I can do two 8x10" plein air paintings with only an ounce of water, using about a half ounce in each palette cup. One is for rinsing dirty brushes (wiped first); the other is for more thorough cleaning after cleaning in cup #1, or for thinning paint slightly. When I'm done, I wipe out whatever tiny bit of water remains in the cups with the rest of the paper towel I was using to wipe my brushes. That way, I'm not even leaving any waste water on location, and am only using an ounce or so of my drinking water.

Jamie
Thanks for that, Jamie. They look like a good design -- and more spill-resistant than most.

Oil painters have been at it a lot longer than acrylic painters, and seem to have come up with a thing or two that might be useful.

I like the palette cup idea.

JamieWG
08-07-2008, 04:54 PM
Just a thought as I continue my studies with Golden Open . . . it seems to me that these two paints are really different from one another. Golden Open was designed to stay wet - all the time. Interactive was designed as an acrylic that provides an artist with the advantage of arcylic wet-in-wet techniques if they choose to continue to work that way. But, if an artist wants to do wet-over-dry, they certainly can. Does anyone else have a thought on this? As I continue to work with both of these acrylics, I really am finding true differences. Yesterday, when I was painting by the river, it came to me that these two companies each really have a unique paint! It's just really all in the way you want to work.

I agree with you completely. These two products are totally different.

Jamie

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 05:06 PM
I agree with you completely. These two products are totally different.

Jamie

I would respectfully and in a friendly way have to demur.

JamieWG
08-07-2008, 05:17 PM
I would respectfully and in a friendly way have to demur.

:D That's what makes the world go round, isn't it? Well, perhaps I should have phrased it differently: I can only do what I do, the way I do it, with one of these products. They do not behave the same way. Although either can be muscled into behaving more like the other, it really is not necessary to do so. Why should I alter my technique to suit a product, when I can instead have a product that suits my technique? We are so fortunate to have two wonderful---and different---choices!

Jamie

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 05:18 PM
They are described by their own makers in very similar, overlapping, sometimes nearly identical terms.

They are both artist-grade paints.

They are both artist-grade acrylic paints.

They both have the ability to dry more slowly than any other acrylic on the market.

They are very, very similar products in many ways.

And there are many other acrylics that do not share their special characteristics or capabilities; but even these are quite similar products in many ways – and certainly they are all acrylic paints, rather than oils or watercolors or alkyds (which are still all paints used by artists, and can still be compared -- and often are -- in many books and elsewhere), or beach balls or rocket engines or cricket antennae.

Opens are the only other line of acrylics that have the long-open-time capabilities. They are singled out by Jim Cobb as being the only other acrylic paint with that characteristic. Although there are many other similarities, that in itself exempts them from being totally different.

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 05:20 PM
:D That's what makes the world go round, isn't it? Well, perhaps I should have phrased it differently: I can only do what I do, the way I do it, with one of these products. They do not behave the same way. Although either can be muscled into behaving more like the other, it really is not necessary to do so. Why should I alter my technique to suit a product, when I can instead have a product that suits my technique? We are so fortunate to have two wonderful---and different---choices!

Jamie

Jamie,

We cross-posted.

I'm glad you have rephrased it a bit.

The term "totally different" was giving me some kind of indigestion.

;)

jm-art
08-07-2008, 07:53 PM
Nilesh/Jamie - Yeah . . . I am certainly familiar with all of the Interactive information as I have been creating art with it since 2005, but you are correct, Golden's literature and website on Open do seem to be a mirror image of what the Interactive information portrays. While you can do the same wet-in-wet techniques with both paints, the manner in which you get to it . . . is different. And the acrylics are certainly different under the brush.

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 08:12 PM
Nilesh/Jamie - Yeah . . . I am certainly familiar with all of the Interactive information as I have been creating art with it since 2005, but you are correct, Golden's literature and website on Open do seem to be a mirror image of what the Interactive information portrays. While you can do the same wet-in-wet techniques with both paints, the manner in which you get to it . . . is different. And the acrylics are certainly different under the brush.

The manner you get to it is different -- I've been finding that too.

If you feel like it, please feel free to share more about your experiences and impressions and experiments and painting sessions with them, including your impressions of how each of them feels under the brush.

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 08:17 PM
(Y) New Possibilities, Synergistic Extensions, and Symbiotic Approaches:

This occurred to me this morning: Since deficiencies or drawbacks of both can be corrected or filled-in by using acrylics from outside the lines – by using different, outside products in concert, or in symbiosis with these product lines – there may be some new possibilities that haven't been explored yet.

Golden often mentions the possibility of adding faster-drying acrylics (non-Open acrylics) to speed up the drying times, or for applying faster underlayers, or both; and users also have mentioned these possibilities.

Golden also mentions the possibility of using one or more faster-drying acrylics for the underpainting, then using Opens for the next phase of the painting, where more blending abilities are desired -- and then, for the next phase, mixing Opens with a faster-drying paint or medium. This is shown clearly in the demonstration video linked above: all three approaches are used in the same painting (at first, the faster non-Opens are used alone, then Opens are used alone, and then a mixture of Opens and non-Opens are used to finish the painting).

This amounts to something like a symbiosis between Opens and non-Opens, or a synergy ["synergy... from the Greek word synergia, meaning joint work and cooperative action. Synergy is when the result is greater than the sum of the parts."]; or it can be seen as an extension of the range of possibilities, both for users of Golden Opens and for users of conventional acrylics -- the combined use “truly extends the possibilities,” as Mark Golden says in the video above, when introducing the Opens. They are an extension of the possibilities of conventional acrylics; and the Opens' possibilities can be extended even further by using a combined or synergistic approach.

Interactive users might also benefit from the addition of complementary products from outside the line. For example: a drawback (for some people) of the Interactives is the fact that adding Slow Medium to the paint can be somewhat inconvenient, depending on the person and situation [[although it should be added that you can still re-open and blend, even without using the Slow Medium (and that there are multiple options here -- spraying, or wetting with a brush, or adding water to the brush and re-opening directly, or using Unlocking Formula, or using water plus retarder, or liquid medium), and that you can re-open and blend for a long period of time, even after the paints are touch dry, especially when using the Unlocking Formula]]. The inconvenience can be remedied, though, by adding a synergistic element.

[[side question arises here: It is rarely mentioned that you can also spray and re-open the Interactives using a liquid medium (usually it is either plain water or Unlocking Formula). Mediums or mixes might have advantages, though (even if relatively subtle advantages), over plain water at times.
Wouldn’t this be another option that could be useful at times? – not one of the major fundamental modes of Interactive use, but an additional option that might have advantages for some people, or for more advanced users, in some situations? It could, for example, be used to affect the handling characteristics or the wet time during the re-opened paint’s blending period.]]

In the same way that you can add to or synergistically extend or complement Opens, with products from outside the line, so with Interactives.

Conventional acrylics used alongside Opens for underpaintings still retain all of the problems or drawbacks or limitations associated with them (like the inability to re-open and blend), which problems both lines have been addressing (in a major way) with their systems' new possibilities and capabilities. There is a good solution for these drawbacks, though (and the same is true for the Interactives); but I’ve never seen this possibility mentioned.

The fuller, more complete synergy, or the more symbiotic, would be to use them together.

Together -- Concerted Use

***
[There may even be cases in which the synergy would be even more complete using all three together – Atelier Interactives, Golden Opens, and other acrylics – each contributing its own strengths to the concert. All of them could perform together like the instruments in a good chamber orchestra.

Some people may want to limit the number of products they have or use, at times at least; but in other cases it might be good to have this fuller set of instruments available. And there are probably quite a few people who already have most if not all of the components of this wider system in place.

Using Interactives for underpainting, rather then using conventional acrylics, could have advantages in some cases; having the Opens available could ease the painting process during extended wet-in-wet sessions in some cases; having conventional acrylics available could ease the process during very fast layering sessions, passages or phases; and so on....]

:music:

JamieWG
08-07-2008, 09:12 PM
Jamie,

We cross-posted.

I'm glad you have rephrased it a bit.

The term "totally different" was giving me some kind of indigestion.

;)

I'm sorry, Nilesh. Here, this is for the indigestion I gave you : http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/07-Aug-2008/13766-pill.gif

Jamie :D

Nilesh
08-07-2008, 09:19 PM
Thanks, Jamie. ;)

jennifervs
08-08-2008, 09:28 AM
Jennifer, there is one part of what he says that puzzles me just a bit: "...slow painting sessions with extensive blending, like with oils, xcept that at the end of a session the painting can be dried out rapidly if necessary...." He may be talking about using the paints with Slow Medium, it seems to me; but the last part -- about drying out rapidly at the end of a session if necessary -- I'm not entirely sure about. It sounds like an attractive addition to their versatility, and an option or possibility I would like to have available; but I'm not quite sure what it is he is suggesting here. Or maybe he is not talking about using them with Slow Medium, but re-opening with water? Then the fast drying would naturally be available....]

What Jim means is that unlike oils, paintings done with Interactive can be dried quickly by sitting it in the sun or using a hair dryer, even if you've been working really wet. This can be a big advantage if you want to do some wet-over-dry techniques like scumbling or glazing. If you were working with oils, it could be days - weeks - before it was safe to do these techniques.

eliza ollin
08-08-2008, 08:41 PM
Thanks Nilesh and Jamie, palette cups=great idea! I raced out to buy some today, because right now there are just puddles of medium and thinner all over my palette. Of course, I got sidetracked by the OPENs, came home with new paint and gel medium, but no palette cups! There's always tomorrow, I love any excuse to get to Blick's :)

jm-art
08-09-2008, 10:12 AM
Nilesh - Under the brush, it is definitely a tactile feeling of the Interactives being a rich paint and the Opens being a runny paint. I have a very difficult time making a mark with the Opens due to their consistency . . . I can't pick enough of it up on my brush to paint in the style I like to paint in. And there is certainly a difference in the opacity. I have no problems blocking in with Interactive, but with the Opens, it seems I have difficulty due to the transparency of the colors and I guess this is because they have a lower pigment load than the Interactives.

The manner in which I do my blending with Opens the paint stays wet on the palette and on the canvas as long as I continue to add more paint to the surface, but oftentimes, I end up getting a mess with the paint lifting. With Interactives, I just mist or add more paint to continue blending, and because it gets touch dry, I don't have the issues of it pulling up. I have used the slow medium and the thick slow medium - depending on what consistency is desired - and it does make the Interactives stay wet even longer without the use of misting. But for the purposes of my personal studies, I have just been using both straight out of the tube.

I really think it all comes down to the way a person likes to paint and the style. You can do the blending with both - just a different way to achieve it.

Personal painting styles will dictate which acrylic one likes the most. I don't believe in pitting one paint against the other - like a wrestling match, but a healthy comparison such as the one that has been conducted here is educational and informative. Both Opens and Interactives have unique properties on the way in which the world of acrylic painting is using advanced technology, and hopefully, all for the better for those of us who like to create art. I think it's only fair to look at what each company has embraced as new, and value it at a level of professionalism. Interactive is not a "bad" paint because it doesn't stay wet on the palette as long as Open. Open is not a "bad" paint because it doesn't give you the consistency or high pigment load that Interactives does . . . both paints are made to offer artists a new manner in which to work.

Barry Sholder
08-20-2008, 04:03 PM
I recently finished a test using Golden Open and Interactive. I used the same colors of each same surface and prep and subject matter. I will show the document as well as the two paintings. I was not thrilled with Open. I typically like strong colors and usually paint big shapes first. For me it just didn't make it, but this only my opinion.

tbezesky
08-20-2008, 04:48 PM
Finally somebody shows some concrete results, instead of just talk, you can show. Thanks Barry!:thumbsup:

Lust for life
08-20-2008, 06:04 PM
Golden told me in an e-mail recently, that their Golden OPEN paint has a higher pigment to binder ratio after it dries, than any of their other paint.

awerth
08-20-2008, 06:09 PM
Barry,

Thanks for the detailed comparison. My own conclusions are very different from yours (I *love* painting representational work with the Opens, whose texture and handling feels natural to me, whereas I felt Interactives didn't behave very differently from regular acrylics), but it's helpful to have another honest comparison. Nice paintings, btw.

-Andrew

Lust for life
08-20-2008, 06:12 PM
Im not sure why, but I like the barn painting with the opens better.

tbezesky
08-20-2008, 06:22 PM
I like your painterly style too, and I like your Interactives painting better, at least I see a difference at the bottom.
Opens do thicken overtime on the palette. I keep my palette going on and on and maintain the thickness by adding more paint. After a month I haven't thrown out any paint out. I am still working on this method.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Aug-2008/11381-pallette.jpg
The yellow is fresh paint and the rest is fresh and old mix.

jm-art
08-21-2008, 08:21 AM
Barry - Nice paintings. If you look back further in this thread, I did a comparison as well, and my findings were almost exactly like yours.

Lust for Life - If Golden OPEN paint has a higher pigment to binder ratio after it dries, than any of their other paint, it certainly doesn't feel or look that way. Anyone can make the "numbers" say what they want them to say. However, no matter which way you slice it, the OPEN is very runny, and Interactive is juicy.

Tracy - Have you tried the same thing with Interactives on your palette?

Lust for life
08-21-2008, 11:19 AM
jm art, I agree with you.
I was very surprised when Golden told me that it has the highest pigment to binder ratio after it dries.
Would this mean, open dries more opaque?

tbezesky
08-21-2008, 11:52 AM
jm-art I don't know, with Interactives I was more concerned with keeping the palette wet, and it would dry even faster. I will see what happens.

GabrielZ
08-21-2008, 08:42 PM
Hello everyone...I have been following the conversation and absorbing all the points and facts brought forth. There is a wealth of insight to both these paints. My curiousity has been peaked to work with the Opens, however, I find that I am perfectly content with Interactives and have found no reason to deviate at this point. I support that the value of a product is deemed by the suitability to the artist's technique. I used to paint with standard acrylics for large murals and found that I had to "hit it" first time to get the effect I wanted. After discovering Interactives, I fell in love. The control that I now have on what speed and technique that I want to use is liberating. I especially love the ability to re-open layers as I often only have small chunks of time to work in my studio. I generally work very large and need extended open time at my discretion -if you will...so I personally adore this product. In addition, the creamy texture is luxurious to me! I look forward to more conversation and find the comparison paintings that some artists have taken time to do very interesting. Thank you so much for all the energy and input. We are all (obviously) very passionate about our paints.

Bright Eyes
08-22-2008, 01:02 AM
Has anyone tried the OPENs and Interactive in the same painting? I currently have a whole bunch of the regular golden paints and gels. My paintings consist of very very thick textures in some areas and very delicate fine details in other areas of the same painting. I want to try Interactive for the detailed areas so I have more time to work in the details. Does anyone know if it would cause problems? I know that all acrylic paints can work together. Just wondering if anyone has actually tried the two paints layered together in one painting.

Adriantmax
08-22-2008, 02:13 AM
I've used golden white with interactives, and W&N Finity mixed with interactives no problem. I also used Finity with interactive slow medium for transparent glazing, worked well since there was so much more medium than finity colour the glaze behaves much like interactives and can still be unlocked for quite some time with the spray or working in other wet glaze colour.

jm-art
08-22-2008, 07:41 AM
Lust for Life - In my personal experience, Open does not dry more opaque. If you look at Barry's paintings, and earlier in the thread, my paintings . . . you can see that there is actually some tranparency. Again, I believe Golden is just playing a numbers game.

Bright Eyes - I have not tried Open and Interactive on the same painting, but have used the regular Golden for my underpainting and Interactive on successive layers that I wanted to spend more time detailing. I have had no issues. I noticed, however, if you mix the two . . . you don't get the full effect of Interactive's capabilities.

GabrielZ - I know exactly what you mean by stating that Interactive is liberating because it allows you to work at the speed you want. With Opens, it just takes too long to dry at some points, and again, it is just very runny and hard to pick up with the brush to get enough coverage.

Tracy - I use a sta-wet palette but make sure the sponge is wringed out and not dripping wet. This seems to keep the Interactives open. I'm interested to hear your thoughts too. With the Opens, I found that I just got puddles, but the way you are doing it on the palette looks like it works.

tbezesky
08-22-2008, 12:31 PM
Adriantmax- what is the difference in drying time between straight Finitys and straight Interactives without the slow drying medium?

Jm-art - yes for opens on the palette I wouldn't use any water. Being uncovered for a few hours just makes it a little thicker.
Do you always mix the slow medium with the Interactives on the palette?

Adriantmax
08-22-2008, 02:03 PM
To be honest I'm not noticing much difference in drying times between Finity and Interactives out the tube. The other day I made some smears within a few seconds of one another with burnt sienna to show the difference between the two burnt siennas.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Aug-2008/128190-Burnt_Sienna.jpg

The photo suggests there isn't much difference out the tube. The big difference betwen the two paints is that Finity has a skin so once dry it stays dry whilst Interactive doesn't so adding water will make the dry interactives behave like watercolour. You can water the interactives for quite some time. Days even, but that requires some scrubbing to get the colour out.

Bright Eyes
08-22-2008, 03:00 PM
Bright Eyes - I have not tried Open and Interactive on the same painting, but have used the regular Golden for my underpainting and Interactive on successive layers that I wanted to spend more time detailing. I have had no issues. I noticed, however, if you mix the two . . . you don't get the full effect of Interactive's capabilities.




Thank you! That was exactly what I was wondering.:)

Trier
08-22-2008, 09:28 PM
FWIW here are 2 quick and dirty sketches done under almost the same conditions, hot and humid, on sucessive days. OPEN and Interactive. PAs, of course.

Both are 12x18 on very thin buff colored construction paper, only water and no mediums were used except that on the Interactive I used liquitex Slow dry blending medium with regular acrylic T White. On the OPEN one I used regular acrylic T White without any medium.

The OPEN has been posted in the Golden OPEN Experiments thread, with a palette description, except I forgot to say I also used Iron Oxide Transparent.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Aug-2008/89990-NanasHibiscusx700DSCN0235.JPG

Here is the Interactive one




http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Aug-2008/89990-InterAct700xDSCN0238.JPG

Both did not buckle or warp the paper

The OPENs stayed wet on the palette with only minimal spraying but the IAs needed almost as much spraying as regular acrylics.
The OPENs stayed wetter on the paper much longer than the IAs but I was still able to wet and wipe off accidents on the IAs for a little bit.
Neither one go very far when you touch the brush to the paper.

Waiting till tomorrow to see if either one has skinned over on the palettes.

They both could benefit from some gloss medium IMHO, but the idea was to compare roughly both of them as they come out of the tube.

I personally like the IAs colors a bit better than the OPENs.

They both show great promise toward my ideal of an acrylic that stays wet on the palette, but fast dry with a small window of blendability on the support, and juicy colors. Without having to juggle mediums constantly, one can but hope.

Regards,

Trier

Barry Sholder
08-24-2008, 09:40 AM
Hi Guys One thing that came to mind that I failed to mention about my comparison test with Interactive and Open was the fact that I did not use any mediums on either painting. As mention earlier that Interactive acted like regular acrylics. You are absolutely correct..... But you can also do things with with Interactive that you can't do with regular acrylics. The mediums available for Interactive allow you to do all kinds of things. I have used the Modeling Compound for textural painting. Hard to do with runny paint! I have used the Impasto gel to textural effects (not quite as thick as modeling compound) and I have used the Slow mediums to thin Interactive to a watercolor consistancy and painted washes on watercolor paper(using Binder medium to prep the paper before application. So yes it is just like other acrylics...,Plus more.
The attached painting is done on watercolor paper with slow binder added .

Lust for life
08-24-2008, 10:13 AM
I would like to try the Atelier Interactives.
I think I should compare them for myself to the opens before I place a large order of golden opens.
I noticed you get more paint for your money with the Atelier Interactives compared to Golden open.
They have a larger color range also.

Does anyone sell an Atelier Interactives intro set with small tubes like Golden does with their open?
I seen a Atelier Interactives seven 80ml tube set, but I would prefer a smaller size tube set.

tbezesky
08-24-2008, 12:12 PM
Barry your paintings look very sketchy, I like that!

Barry Sholder
08-25-2008, 09:42 AM
Tracy, thanks for the compliment. When I paint with acrylics and watercolors I am very loose and sketchy. I have a short attention span so I like to get the suggestion of what I'm after quickly. I don't like to paint very realistic as there doesn't seem to be as much of a challenge for me as trying to paint what I see in it's simplest forms. I also like to paint very wet and see what the paint does. I do paint tighter periodically but the sketchy is a lot more fun. It's like a box of chocolates..........!

Nilesh
08-25-2008, 03:29 PM
I would like to try the Atelier Interactives.
I think I should compare them for myself to the opens before I place a large order of golden opens.
I noticed you get more paint for your money with the Atelier Interactives compared to Golden open.
They have a larger color range also.

Does anyone sell an Atelier Interactives intro set with small tubes like Golden does with their open?
I've seen Atelier Interactives seven 80ml tube set, but I would prefer a smaller size tube set.

Hi Lust for life,

This seems to be an excellent set. It is also well-priced:

http://www.dickblick.com/zz016/16a/

***
[Please feel free to post your experiences, impressions, observations, etc., if you give them a try.]

Barry Sholder
08-25-2008, 03:31 PM
You can't go wrong with that set.

Lust for life
08-25-2008, 03:35 PM
Thanks Barry, I already ordered the set this morning.
Good thing I check Blick's, it is an exclusive set there, and they are running low on them.

So much more for your money compared to the golden open intro sets.

I am dubious about the PR48.4 used in the crimson though.

Bright Eyes
08-25-2008, 03:48 PM
Very nice painting Berry!

I just ordered the Interactive set from Blick's yesterday! I ordered another five extra colors along with it. Haven't used them before and can't wait to start experimenting! I'll post my pic in a week or two when its done.

johnmk
08-25-2008, 03:49 PM
There are usually only "series 1" colors in these sorts of sets, I do wish they would add a single cadmium somewhere...just to see what it can do :-) you can always upgrade the red later if you like the paints overall.
johnk.

Nilesh
08-25-2008, 04:00 PM
Hi John,

Cadmiums are one of my favorite topics: ;)

http://wetcanvas.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7080483&postcount=10

Nilesh
08-25-2008, 04:16 PM
I agree that many sets seem to be series-one sets.

Wondering exactly how this particular set from Chroma stood, I checked:


Dioxazine Purple............................Series Three

Crimson........................................Series One

Arylamide Yellow Light...................Series Three

Phthalo Green................................Series One

Perinone Orange............................Series Two

Titanium White...............................Series One

Carbon Black..................................Series One

French Ultramarine Blue..................Series Two

Yellow Ochre..................................Series One

Burnt Sienna..................................Series One

Permanent Green Light....................Series Two

Arylamide Yellow Deep....................Series Three

Lust for life
08-25-2008, 04:33 PM
Plus they give you mediums and a small water sprayer!

JamieWG
08-25-2008, 04:48 PM
I agree that many sets seem to be series-one sets.

Wondering exactly how this particular set from Chroma stood, I checked:


Dioxazine Purple............................Series Three

Crimson........................................Series One

Arylamide Yellow Light...................Series Three

Phthalo Green................................Series One

Perinone Orange............................Series Two

Titanium White...............................Series One

Carbon Black..................................Series One

French Ultramarine Blue..................Series Two

Yellow Ochre..................................Series One

Burnt Sienna..................................Series One

Permanent Green Light....................Series Two

Arylamide Yellow Deep....................Series Three

I'd have a really hard time judging paints from this assortment of colors. The only ones I use regularly from this list are titanium white and french ultramarine! When I purchased Interactives, I bought a limited number of tubes of the colors I generally use, so I could get a clear idea of what they would do for me.

Jamie

Nilesh
08-25-2008, 05:02 PM
I've tried both approaches, and like them both.

A few big tubes of very useful (or familiar) colors -- or an experiment with a compact, but versatile and effective palette of a few good colors -- can work out quite well.

I also enjoy seeing what can be done with the sets provided by certain companies.

I feel that the better companies (like Chroma and Golden) tend to select the colors very carefully and thoughtfully in their sets. They also tend to showcase some great colors. And they are versatile, and mix well. Sometimes you can learn, or pick up, or come to appreciate new colors, mixes, and approaches too.

Adriantmax
08-25-2008, 05:12 PM
yeah its a odd mix of pigments but the colour range in the pic looks good and the price is hard to beat :)

I paid about $6 for the series 1 tubes, and $8 for one bottle of medium. I think that starter kit is excellent value for anyone wanting to give the interactives a trial run. Just a little more than a regular tube of cadmium plus shipping :) (local store prices)

johnmk
08-25-2008, 05:56 PM
Hi John,

Cadmiums are one of my favorite topics: ;)

http://wetcanvas.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7080483&postcount=10

Nilesh,
Point well taken!
johnk.

Bright Eyes
08-25-2008, 08:23 PM
I haven't studied colors much but what is with the Cadmiums? And why are there series to the colors?

Nilesh
08-25-2008, 08:32 PM
Some pigments (the powders that go into the tubes, after being mixed with colorless acrylic mediums or binders) are more expensive than others. Usually the pigments are a major part of the cost, for the manufacturers.

If they have to use a very expensive pigment powder or powders (for a certain color), they pass the cost on to the artist.

Series one paints usually use pigments that are not so expensive, so the manufactures' costs are lower, and they can sell the tubes for less money.

Series two and higher cost more, depending mainly on how expensive the powdered pigments were.

Series one paints are not necessarily inferior at all -- they contain some excellent colors and lightfast, beautiful pigments -- they are just less expensive to make.

*******
Cads? See today's thread:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?t=514343

Bright Eyes
08-25-2008, 11:42 PM
Very interesting. I knew the cads where toxic because of the "X" on the tube but had no idea how toxic.

Adriantmax
08-27-2008, 02:16 AM
I don't think the populatity of interactives is fanboyism, but more to do with the fact that they have been out for a lot longer. About a year in the US, whilst opens only just arrived and few people have had the opportunity to try them yet.

I intend to get one of the small starter sample packs next month when the next pay check comes in :).

Interactives are different to regular acrylics, but not comparable to Opens with their oil like blending capabilities. Not sure if I said it on this thread or another, but interactives are like acrylics that over a few days dry into first a watercolour like state and then slowly seal over time.

Blending wet in wet doesn't work in the traditional sense, after about 20 minutes you pretty much have to scrub wet into dry and the dry paint disolves and lets you blend in a way similar to watercolour.

I can see Opens being better for doing oil like techniques, if you like the consistency of the paint.

Bright Eyes
08-27-2008, 02:57 PM
To each his/her own! I personally favor PS3...:)
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, who can deny the blue ray advantage?

Anyways, back to the art! This is a fanboy thread! Lucky for Interactive being around longer there are more fans!

[[ Advantage: Interactives]]

I'm working on a painting right now with the normal Golden as background and underpaint, and the Interactives for the detailed faces. I'm waiting for my order of interactive to get here but this is what I've done so far with the Golden.http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Aug-2008/139098-R--G-2.jpg

Lust for life
08-27-2008, 03:56 PM
I know this is an Acrylic topic, but for the record, I am a water miscible oil fanboy!
Im new to acrylics, but so far I havent found an acrylic paint I love.
My atelier interactive paint set arrives tomorrow.
I will see if they are as good as many people say they are.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 04:26 PM
Please let us keep the discussion on-topic -- on the thread's topic -- and on a more intelligent and mature level.

Lady Carol
08-27-2008, 04:57 PM
Please keep this thread on topic and play nice.

WC! does not accept back and forth taunting. If a member chooses not to post any of their work then that is their decision. How you respond to that is your decision. It does not need to be voiced.

All posts that had no value in this thread have been deleted.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 05:03 PM
Thank you.

Yes, I had tried to explain the intended meaning of the word advantage in earlier posts. However, I came to realize that some people were misinterpreting it (despite the explanations). So I dropped it some time ago.

It might have some utility at times; but it seems to bring up certain reactions in some people. It was never meant to be conclusive. It was intended more along the lines of liveliness and conciseness; and such terms are sometimes seen in serious reviews of cameras, both online and in serious photography magazines.

As far as comparisons between {comparisons between cameras} and {comparisons between lines of paint}, it is a potentially large topic, and it is somewhat off-topic as well.

Glad to see the thread returning to on-topic and more-mature levels of discourse.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 05:16 PM
I know this is an Acrylic topic, but for the record, I am a water miscible oil fanboy!
Im new to acrylics, but so far I havent found an acrylic paint I love.
My atelier interactive paint set arrives tomorrow.
I will see if they are as good as many people say they are.

Thanks for sharing that.

It would be very interesting to hear your experiences and observations. Please feel free to share them here at any time; they are welcomed.


***
Golden will send you samples of Opens, if you want to try them as well.

(And if you end up trying them both -- separately or side-by-side, or even together in the same painting -- please let us know what your findings are there as well. Your participation here is appreciated.)

Bright Eyes
08-27-2008, 05:17 PM
Lust for life- My set is supposed to arrive tomorrow as well, looks like we're in the same boat! I've always painted with acrylics, tried other paints just didn't like them. I will really be looking forward to the conclusions on your experiments once the paint arrives. You being a fan of oil, and me a fan of acrylic I think we could come up with some really good comparisons coming from both sides! I really want to see if the Interactives are more like oil, or like a an acrylic that just stays wet longer. I'm really hoping for the acrylic that stays wet longer. I don't like oil (painting with that is, love the pictures themselves) I don't do the blending techniques. From what I have read on this thread (thanks for the info Nilesh) I think the Interactives having the ability to add the mediums to make them wet longer when needed, or being able to reopen when needed is what I could really work with. Can't wait to try them!

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 05:40 PM
Lust for life- My set is supposed to arrive tomorrow as well, looks like we're in the same boat! I've always painted with acrylics, tried other paints just didn't like them. I will really be looking forward to the conclusions on your experiments once the paint arrives. You being a fan of oil, and me a fan of acrylic I think we could come up with some really good comparisons coming from both sides! I really want to see if the Interactives are more like oil, or like an acrylic that just stays wet longer. I'm really hoping for the acrylic that stays wet longer. I don't like oil (painting with that is, love the pictures themselves) I don't do the blending techniques. From what I have read on this thread (thanks for the info Nilesh) I think the Interactives having the ability to add the mediums to make them wet longer when needed, or being able to reopen when needed is what I could really work with. Can't wait to try them!

Great -- would love to hear from both of you.

The question of maximizing Interactives' drying times is a relevant one: this point about drying times has come up repeatedly. There is a video on the Chroma website about achieving long blending times which might be of value for this, and worth checking out.

If you end up sampling Opens, it would be interesting to hear comparisons on how long they stay wet for you relative to Interactives (when used in optimized long-drying-time modes).

Also, the length of rewetting/reopening times is of interest (both with water and with the Unlocking Formula).

Different people live in different climates, and paint under different conditions (and individual painters also paint during different seasons and under different conditions); the paints' behaviors can be different under different conditions, and feedback from different places and different painters can be revealing and valuable. It is very much welcomed and appreciated here.

Lust for life
08-27-2008, 05:41 PM
I tried the opens, and they are ok.
I will probably end up using acrylics only on smaller paintings, and use oils on larger works.

Bright Eyes
08-27-2008, 05:47 PM
Would you happen to have a direct link to the video on the Chroma site?

Lust for life
08-27-2008, 05:48 PM
Actually I bought Finity, open, and interactive acylics all this summer.
I am evaluating all three paints at the same time.
I need time to adjust to acrylics, but when I am ready, I will post my thoughts on all three.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 05:50 PM
I tried the opens, and they are ok.
I will probably end up using acrylics only on smaller paintings, and use oils on larger works.

It would be interesting to hear more about your experiences with the opens.

Jim Cobb mentions large paintings, and possibly useful approaches for large paintings, on a video here:

http://www.chromaonline.com/chroma/products/atelier_interactive/video_library

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 05:56 PM
Would you happen to have a direct link to the video on the Chroma site?
That was a good one -- my last posting was cross-posted, before I read your post. In one of the videos there (at the link given above), he deals specifically with using Interactives in larger paintings. Some of the other videos on that page might also be of interest.

There is also a set of videos here (some are the same as the ones in the above link, some are different; and the videos that are linked below may work better on some computers than the above-linked videos. Some of these can also be viewed in full-screen mode by clicking on the appropriate icons and selections):

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=atelier+interactives&emb=0&aq=f#

One point that is rarely mentioned, but is worth keeping in mind, is that the paints can be re-opened with a wet brush -- the same brush you already have in your hand and are using for blending. You can just dip it in a water container kept nearby. You don't really need to spray or mist with an atomizer (although you can use an atomizer, and it can be useful at times).

Dipping in Slow Medium can also be useful under some conditions.

He demonstrates and explains the wet-brush blending technique somewhere in one of the videos. For me, it is a very convenient technique to know. And it works with Opens (maybe not identically, but under some conditions) as well as with Interactives.

Lust for life
08-27-2008, 06:01 PM
I doubt I would ever use an acrylic paint for a painting larger than 18x24.
I plan on using oils on large works while taking my time, and while layers are drying on the oil painting, I can work on smaller works(11x14 to 18x24) until I resume work on the larger oil painting.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 06:26 PM
I doubt I would ever use an acrylic paint for a painting larger than 18x24.
I plan on using oils on large works while taking my time, and while layers are drying on the oil painting, I can work on smaller works(11x14 to 18x24) until I resume work on the larger oil painting.

It's your freedom, of course. I'm planning to give it a try -- just to see -- along the lines shown in the video.

***
There is a technique used by muralists that might be adaptable (or used in some variation or variations for works on canvas, or on other surfaces, and on a smaller scale).

Some of them achieve longer blending times by slathering the substrate with retarder just before painting on it.

This is not an 'officially sanctioned' technique as far as I know; but it is used and favored by some experienced muralists. And the work seems to hold up fine. I don't see why it couldn't be used, or at least tried and experimented with (and tested, for the soundness of the final results), for paintings on other, smaller scales.

Slow Medium and other mediums might be tried in the same way, or retarder itself, or retarder plus water.

And these sorts of techniques could be used for passages and sections, as needed -- they wouldn't have to be limited to whole-canvas applications.

Oils are certainly good for long blending times. There seem to be more options these days, though.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 06:52 PM
[[Just wanted to put in a reminder here: some people seem to think in terms of exclusivity and allegiances and sides. Others do not share this sort of mentality, and tend to stay more openminded or unattached. I attempted to clarify this point some time back, but those postings may have been lost on, or not easily found by some people. There seems to be a need for a 'reminder' (for a few people at least) that this thread is not about rooting for sides or rooting for teams. It is an attempt at a different mentality.

It is an attempt at learning from detailed comparisons, observations, experiments, and shared experiences -- much as people learn from the detailed comparisons of and experiences with cameras, which are done by serious photographers, artists, and writers in the field of fine art photography.

I am very glad that most of the people here can share this approach.]]

Adriantmax
08-27-2008, 07:05 PM
Acrylics don't feel like oils when you lay down the brush strokes. At least not without constantly adding or spraying water or medium. If you try using them like oils with their long wet time, then you need to watch the paints water saturation or you will get the paint starting to tack and dry and drag the stroke.

I believe opens are a little different, one of my buddies has been using them and sais that out the tube or with medium they feel a lot like oils till you start doing glazing and washes, then they still dry fast and you can ruin your wash quite easily if your not quick enough.

So there are still quite a few differences, acrylics for me are great for fast sketchy layered work and sketchbooks, where I can use them with some oil and some watercolour behaviours combined in one medium and don't have to worry about accidents.

Lust for life
08-27-2008, 07:09 PM
The opens do have a little bit of an oily feel to them.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 09:00 PM
The subject of {Interactives with Slow Medium added} compared with {conventional acrylics with retarder added} has come up in several places. It was an issue I wondered about at first.

It turned out that there are very significant differences: the Interactives can be re-opened in several different ways, and for a very long time. They can be blended throughout this period of time, which usually lasts for days.

Conventional acrylics cannot do this at all. Opens can do it, but not for as long a period of time, and not in the same ways.

Nilesh
08-27-2008, 09:57 PM
Jennifer, if you're there:

Although re-opening and re-wetting and re-consituting the paint for blending (with water, or Slow Medium, or other paints or mediums, or with water plus retarder)(are there other options?) is always one approach, some people want long, continuous wet periods, at times at least.

So the issue of optimizing or maximizing wet times is a relevant one here. It would be interesting to hear more about the options and techniques for this (even unusual ones).

I know that some people have taken steps to have more control over the ambient humidity levels, and that would be one approach to explore. But there may be others.

Some people have mentioned speeding up the Opens when needed, by putting them out in the sun; maybe there are some additional ways of slowing down the Interactives as desired?

*******
[[Aside: Is it out of the question that Chroma might come up with additional ways (or products) to make Interactives have even longer wet blending times (in the above way), for those who want this?]]

Adriantmax
08-27-2008, 11:11 PM
I was actually thinking of trying the open mediums with interactives and see how they worked together. Has anyone with both tried this?

Barry Sholder
08-28-2008, 10:24 AM
I did more tests yesterday while it's been raining so much( love to paint while it's raining). Anyway I decided to retest Open straight from the tube with how ever long it takes to dry. I have attached my findings.
Also, I did some experimenting with Interactive as a watercolor medium, and really had a ball. I have attached that report as well. Check out the thumbnails. The grapes are Open on canvas. The other two paintings are Interactive on bare watercolor paper.

JamieWG
08-28-2008, 10:52 AM
I did more tests yesterday while it's been raining so much( love to paint while it's raining). Anyway I decided to retest Open straight from the tube with how ever long it takes to dry. I have attached my findings.
Also, I did some experimenting with Interactive as a watercolor medium, and really had a ball. I have attached that report as well. Check out the thumbnails. The grapes are Open on canvas. The other two paintings are Interactive on bare watercolor paper.

Barry I totally LOVE all of these paintings. Big WOW from me! :clap:

I agree with you about using ultramarine to mix darks with Golden OPEN. I sometimes add the cobalt to my palette, but not as a substitute for the ultramarine. Generally I mix darks with ultramarine and transparent red oxide or burnt sienna, like you usually do. It's likely that with all that rain, the humidity resulted in a slower drying time than usual. You can take a hair dryer to it to speed things along a little.

Is there any reason that regular, traditional acrylics would not work on the watercolor paper the way the Interactives did? Those paintings are really wonderful. I've used Golden OPEN this way too, starting with washes and then laying on thicker color on watercolor paper. I love that approach.

Jamie

Barry Sholder
08-28-2008, 11:22 AM
Jamie to be honest with you I have never tried any other acrylics. I have always been a watercolorist till I was introduced to Interactive. I must say this, I have taken watercolor paper and coated it with Intereactives Binder medium to seal the paper, then painted as watercolors although you get a different result(the paint isn't absorbed into the paper).... but with the binder down first, you can go in and make an adjustment like soften an adge, either with water misting or with the unlocking formula, which you wouldn't be able to do with regular acrylics.

JamieWG
08-28-2008, 11:42 AM
Barry, when I saw your paintings, I knew right away that you had a lot of watercolor experience. I use watercolor only for sketching. However, I'm considering taking a class, because I see what it does for general painting technique when I look at work done by artists with a strong watercolor background.

but with the binder down first, you can go in and make an adjustment like soften an adge, either with water misting or with the unlocking formula, which you wouldn't be able to do with regular acrylics.

Barry, actually, you can do this with Golden OPEN without any size or sealer on the paper, and lift color like you can with watercolors. If you do put down a size/sealer, you can remove elements right down to the support.

Here are two that I did on paper, starting with wetter paint. I didn't wet the paper first though. These were done on an Arches block.

This one is plein air, done very quickly by necessity because sunrises are so fleeting!
Serene Sunrise
9x12, Golden OPEN on Arches hp
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/28-Aug-2008/13766-070812_Serene_Sunrise_acrylic_9x12_500.jpg

This one was done in the studio, also 9x12 on Arches hp, Golden OPEN
North Salem Sunset
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/28-Aug-2008/13766-071112_North_Salem_Sunset_9x12_500.jpg

Jamie

JamieWG
08-28-2008, 12:35 PM
Oh---and in the interest of a balanced reply, here is a painting done with Interactives---5x7", on sealed, primed hardboard
Brilliant Morning at the Beach
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/06-Oct-2007/13766-071005_Brilliant_Morning_at_the_Beach_5x7_400.jpg

Jamie

Bright Eyes
08-28-2008, 03:03 PM
Wow all these paintings look amazing! Thanks for posting your experiments Barry, its much appreciated!

Nilesh
08-28-2008, 03:50 PM
I was actually thinking of trying the open mediums with interactives and see how they worked together. Has anyone with both tried this?
This sounds like an interesting line to explore.

These sorts of experiments seem to be happening right here, and we are learning through the shared experimentation.

I'm sure people would be interested to hear the outcomes if you go ahead with trying this -- I certainly would.

Nilesh
08-28-2008, 04:07 PM
I did more tests yesterday while it's been raining so much (love to paint while it's raining). Anyway I decided to retest Open straight from the tube with how ever long it takes to dry. I have attached my findings.
Also, I did some experimenting with Interactive as a watercolor medium, and really had a ball. I have attached that report as well. Check out the thumbnails. The grapes are Open on canvas. The other two paintings are Interactive on bare watercolor paper.

Hi Barry,

Thanks for the very interesting and relevant posts. (I meant to respond to the earlier ones as well, and to thank you for them, but got sidetracked and didn't get back to it at that time -- so thanks for those also.)

I have a soft spot for watercolors, and for some reason had a block or a blind spot in relation to using Interactives in the ways you have tried. Those are beautiful paintings and effects.

The write-ups were also great. Thanks for those too. Linking to the attached reports seems like an excellent way to present the details of your findings. I may try that approach myself, if I end up with detailed write-ups in the future.

Please feel free to post any more at any time.

Nilesh
08-28-2008, 04:18 PM
Hi Jamie,

Thanks so much for your postings here, too. Even though you lean more toward Opens, you are able to remain on a civilized and articulate level, and to stay on topic. It's much appreciated.

I'm learning a lot about both lines of paint here, and look forward to learning more.

There is something about the spark of interaction (if I stay open) that brings new aspects out, and into sharper focus. This process (on this thread) seems to sharpen things. I would not learn as much or as well if I just read about one or the other line of paint in isolation, or used or studied one or the other in isolation. For me, there is something about these sorts of detailed, in-depth, experimental and multi-faceted comparative approaches that adds valuable elements to the learning process.

NM Painter
08-28-2008, 04:30 PM
I realize this is about comparing OPEN and Interactive, and haven't tried Interactive, but I hope sharing my experience with OPEN will help people decide what would work best for their way of working and climate.

As a painter working in the thin dry (15%) air of Santa Fe, I've been dealing with frustration of having to spend way too much time time spritzing with a combo of retarder and water (1/7) and washing expensive paint off my brushes every couple of minutes. I'd rather be painting. So when Golden came out with OPEN, I jumped at it. My Teacher suggested starting with the OPEN medium, gel and thinner first, and three primaries (I got napthol red, hansa yellow opaque, and thalo blue green shade). I mixed Tit. white and mars black 50/50 with OPEN gel to slow and extend them. I feel they also improved opacity in the mixes. I really appreciate the ability to mix OPEN with my considerable investment in standard Golden acrylics and mediums! BTW, the www.goldenpaints.com site has extensive tech info. on their whole line, and they are hungry for feedback on this very new product.

Here's my first try. It was painted in OPEN (50/50 w/ open gel) with a palette knife over a very thinly painted std. acryl. plein aire sketch (awful) from last year. It's on 300# Arches hot press sealed with GAC100. 18"X14". I think I'll continue to use std. acryl. for thin underpainting as it dries in ~5min. out here and I like being able to move right into the final painting without waiting. This painting was done in about 2 hrs., and I had no trouble going back over several area in only 20-30 mins. without 'lifting' the previous layer as long as I used a LIGHT touch. I've also switched from hog bristle to a softer synth. brush to get the same light touch. I really enjoy OPEN so far!
C&C welcome.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/28-Aug-2008/150219-Echo_Amphitheatre_macro_1.jpg

tbezesky
08-28-2008, 04:44 PM
Barry - beautiful paintings, the colors on your light house painting are very playful.
Jamie- great sunsets, I like the stokes and colors in the clouds. The beach scene has a nice feeling of light.
Fredrick- I like the composition and textures, nice painting.

Nilesh
08-28-2008, 04:50 PM
Hi Mercia,

Welcome and thanks for sharing the experiences and painting.

I haven't painted in New Mexico, but I have heard from people who have, and they often express amazement at how fast acrylics tend to dry in some of the climates there.

Jim Cobb discusses a painting trip he took in Australia, where the conditions were challenging. And he discusses the approaches he used for dealing with them. Chroma is an Australian company, and they sell to many artists there. Their country is sometimes called the desert continent, and I'm sure he has dealt with, and tried to address these sorts of issues.

It would be interesting to hear more of what he has to say on this subject. There are forums on the Chroma website where one can ask him these sorts of questions.

Personally, I would be tempted to find a way of painting that does not rely on keeping the paints wet. Some people go back in after a passage is touch dry, then reopen it if needed, and blend or rework in that way. Jennifer (who sometimes posts here) seems to like this approach to painting.

***
If you are interested in constructive C&C, here is some:

I enjoy seeing blue in the shadow areas. It does something for my eyes. Blues and blue-purples, in dynamic counterpoint with subtle warm colors (like thinned raw siennas). There is a Sargent watercolor that is posted somewhere on a recent thread, of a mountainside with rocks and small rivulets. Sargent was a genius with these colors and shadows. I'll try to find that picture and link to it.

Nilesh
08-28-2008, 05:20 PM
Here is the Sargent painting mentioned above:

http://wetcanvas.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7063455&postcount=13

(Viewing from a distance helps to make the effects come into better focus. There are touches of blue in some of the shadow areas that work very well.)

***
Susan Sarback is a painter and teacher who has some very dynamic approaches to color. Many of those who have studied with her say that her approaches revolutionized their art and their perception.

If you do a Google search, you can find some testimonies and reviews.

Her most recent book is here:

http://www.amazon.com/Capturing-Radiant-Light-Color-Pastels/dp/1581809999/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219954199&sr=8-4


Even though she uses oils primarily, acrylics can also be used for her approaches to painting -- the medium is not the main thing for her.

She also gives classes in different parts of the country and abroad. She is based in a small town on the American River (Fair Oaks, Calif.) where she founded the School of Light and Color, which is where she gives many of her classes. There is also at least one DVD available.

I've met her and spoken with her, and she is a very unusual, insightful, and gifted teacher, with deep understanding of color.

I really can't say enough to do justice to the rare quality of her teaching and approaches.

NM Painter
08-28-2008, 05:37 PM
Thanks Nilesh. And thanks for the suggestion. That Sargent is magnificent. I can feel the icy cold air. His range of values, lost and found edges, and cold/warm counterpoint is something to aspire to. I'll check out Susan Sarback too.

NM Painter
08-28-2008, 06:58 PM
Oh, I forgot to include this link to the feedback section of the Golden site:
http://www.goldenpaints.com/blog/2008/paint-ideas/some-transparency-about-open/#comment-715

Nilesh
08-29-2008, 04:03 PM
(Z) Watercolor Techniques with Acrylics:

It was great to discover that both Atelier Interactives and Golden Opens can be used for a variety of watercolor techniques. Thanks to Barry and others for showing this. I was on the verge of buying a whole new line of Da Vinci fluid watercolor acrylics (which are excellent, I have heard), but can do most of what I want to do with what I already have.

This morning I did some testing or experimenting with both lines of paint, alongside traditional watercolors and Lascaux Aquacryls.

[For those who might not be familiar with Aquacryl, here are some descriptions:

http://www.jerrysartarama.com/discount-art-supplies/Acrylic-Paints-and-Mediums/Lascaux-Acrylics-and-Mediums/Lascaux-Aquacryl-Hybrid-Acrylics.htm

http://www.dickblick.com/zz006/42a/

and here is a description of their mediums:

http://www.dickblick.com/zz006/42a/

Lascaux is a Swiss company; their website has additional information about the Aquacyrl line, and their other products.]

*******
There were some unexpected results, and also the accidental discovery of a way to achieve certain sorts of effects that I had been wondering about for years.

The watercolors (aquarelles) were artist-grade tubes, made by Lefranc & Bourgeois.

Here is some of what I found:

Pigment strength is important for some watercolor techniques, not so important for others. In general, I think it is fair to say that most experienced watercolorists (and teachers and books) would indicate that higher pigment loads are more desirable than lower pigment loads.

For certain effects and techniques, the lower pigment loads are not so great; for others they are fine.

The Lascaux Aquacryls, and the tubes of aquarelles from Lefranc & Bourgeois, and the Atelier Interactives did have noticeably higher pigment loads than the Opens.

How important this is, is something that depends on techniques and desired effects, and on individual preferences.

*******
All four paints were able to achieve many similar effects, and all can be used for a variety of watercolor techniques.

However, there were also some noticeable differences:

The Lefranc & Bourgeois aquarelles were *much* better at certain wet-in-wet wash effects used by watercolorists (granulations, blooms and cauliflowers, backruns, others). None of the other paints could match these effects. Sometimes they couldn't even come close.

However, it would only be fair to add that there are some possible additives (both from the watercolor world, and from the world of acrylic products and additives) that would almost certainly help, for many of these effects. In fact, the aquarelles probably behave differently in part because they already contain some of these additives. In the future, I will try some of these additives and other products, and see how the Aquacryls, Opens, and Interactives perform with them.

***
There are some techniques that I particularly like to use with watercolors: some of them involve lifting off dry (or touch-dry) paint, to achieve subtle gradations and other effects.

The aquarelles were by far the best for most of these types of techniques.

The Opens, once dry, were very resistant to lifting -- surprisingly so. I had expected them to be very similar to Aquacryls and Interactives. They were not. (The paper I was using was from an old stash of watercolor paper, and it was fairly absorbent; I will try the experiments again on Arches and Lanaquarelle papers. And I will try them on sealed and less-absorbent surfaces, which will almost certainly behave differently.)

I tried these experiments with dilute washes, and with richer washes as well, and with very rich washes and layers.

It took a bit of 'scrubbing' to get the Interactives to lift [watercolorists use brushes to scrub and then lift layers of paint, often using dry brushes or paper towels or sponges to lift off the loosened paint]. It also helped to allow the paints to moisten or soak a bit, by applying some water before scrubbing and lifting. Either way, they were still more resistant to lifting than the aquarelles.

However, I discovered that I could get some great and very unusual textural effects that I had never quite seen before anywhere -- and they were just the sort of thing that I had been trying to achieve in other ways.

*******
[If anyone wants to experiment with this, try painting several swaths on some absorbent paper (it might work with other papers too, but I haven't tried it yet). Vary the dilution rate, so you have everything from a medium-dilute to a rich to a very rich layer, to very thin layers of undiluted paint.

Then allow them to become touch-dry.

Then go in with a medium-soft brush (I used a Princeton Golden Taklon flat, and also tried a bristle filbert brush) wetted (dipped in) water, and scrub back and forth gently to lift the pigment. This is easiest if done in a fairly small area, about the width of the brush or a bit more. It might help to apply a layer of water first and allow it soak a bit, to re-moisten and soften the paint.

As the pigments slowly start to lift, watch for changing effects.

At a certain point, some very unusual and interesting textural effects will start to emerge.

If you lay down an inititial wash of conventional (non-lifting) acrylic, as an underpainting, you can get some beautiful additional effects from the interplay of colors. A light, warm underpainting of one of the earth colors, for example, would interact with some of the (overpainted and then lifted) cool greens and blues, as these effects emerge. There are many other options as well -- various complementary and analogous combinations, saturation and value contrasts, etc.]

*******
The Aquacryls also took a bit of scrubbing to lift, and I could achieve some similar effects, but they were not quite the same.

I will repeat these experiments under other conditions, with other papers, and see what happens.

Nilesh
08-30-2008, 09:07 PM
(ອA) Opens and Interactives as Watercolor-mode Acrylics II

More experimenting this morning with Opens and Interactives, alongside the aquarelles and Lascaux Aquacryls, all in watercolor mode.

One question I had was about the effects of the surfaces on liftability. Another was how many watercolor effects the Interactives and the Opens were suitable for, and how they compared with watercolors and with acrylics that are made more specifically for watercolor-mode use (the Aquacryls).

More than yesterday, I found that I could get a more satisfactory range of watercolor effects with all of the acrylics.

Substrate absorbancy had a huge influence on Opens' drying times -- much more than with the others. This is to be expected, in a way -- if one were to think it over beforehand -- but it was still surprising to see and experience it in action, and alongside the other paints.

This could be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on what you wanted, and what substrate you were painting on. But either way, it helps me to understand the Opens better, and to be aware of more options and more ways of controlling and fine-tuning the drying times.

It gives Opens more versatility in drying times, for me; and I have more tools at hand for adjusting and controlling those times.

I also found that they can be lifted quite a bit more easily on these less absorbent surfaces. I still don't know why they were so hard (basically impossible, in my experiments) to lift on the more-absorbent paper yesterday, and why they were in such contrast to the other paints in those experiments. Will have to do more experimenting with this, and find out.

Aquacryls lifted more like the aquarelles, when both were used on less-absorbent surfaces.

The aquarelles again lifted beautifully, and I have come to appreciate this quality more, after using them alongside the rest.

The Interactives still took a bit of scrubbing.

I have not yet tried the Unlocking Formula or isopropyl alcohol with the Interactives when used in watercolor mode. I suspect, though, that the lifting characteristics would be quite a bit more like aquarelles. I will try this in future experiments

Basically what I came away with today is a heightened appreciation of the effects of different substrates and different levels of substrate absorbancy. I knew this before, but had never experimented with the different paints alongside one another, and in a variety of different substrate conditions. These experiments brought their different characteristics to light more, and highlighted some points for me very nicely.

deadsam
08-30-2008, 09:18 PM
Cool Thread.
I just went over to the Goldens site to check it out and believe it or not after years of using old faithful liquitex I am going to switch to goldens.
:eek: I almost feel like a traitor now lol.
I'm a matte finish fan myself and golden open comes with a gloss medium but hey what the heck it might be fun to do them in gloss for awhle or just cover it in a clear matte finish at the end of the painting since they are compatable with the other golden products (so they say), I like the fact that I can have a slower drying time (although most time I use a hair dryer cause I like working quick and am imaptient in that area), but those time you like it to be slooowwwwww so you can blend better :thumbsup: ahhh yes it would be nice. So when I land out west in a new frontier (for me anyhow) it's off to the art stores to pick me up the whole freaking line of golden opens lol.
If anyone used this product alot do you know how well it does mix with normal goldens products? (just want to know if they are blowing smoke in my face lol. :cool:
Anyhow here is the link (just in case it's not in this lonnnnggggg thread hiding somewhere about goldens open lol.

http://www.goldenpaints.com/company/news/2008/open.php

:crying: goodbye liquitex :D hello golden open lol

Adriantmax
08-30-2008, 09:59 PM
I wonder how long it will be before liquitex come out with their own competing slow drying wet blendable line of paints.

It seems a bit early yet, and no one has quite hit the mark, but very exciting nonetheless. Certainly shows promise for the future where acrylics are concerned.

deadsam
08-30-2008, 10:15 PM
ya I always been a huge fan of liquitex myself ever siince I remember but if goldens qualities are just as good now (I know in the past they weren't) Ducking from all the rotten tomatoes getting tosed by the golden fans lol.
I just as might as well stick with them :)
either way they will have to do for abit because I have to rebuy all my paints when I land, I'm only taking my brushes (too expensive to give them up) and my archives paper blocks (for the same reason), paints are too but I dont feel like lugging them on a plane.
It will be fun to play with new paints in a new area anyhow :)
If you hear of some lunatic tossing paper pads out a motel window in BC you'll know they didn't work out for me lol

TCharlie
08-31-2008, 06:29 PM
I doubt I would ever use an acrylic paint for a painting larger than 18x24.
I plan on using oils on large works while taking my time, and while layers are drying on the oil painting, I can work on smaller works(11x14 to 18x24) until I resume work on the larger oil painting.

I paint in oils. I keep trying acrylics because I can use them with water but usually I end up just doing roughs for oils with them because they dry so fast. And I'm always unhappy when the color i mix is not the color I get in the final painting.

How would you compare them to oil paints ? I typically work smaller than 18x 24.

NM Painter
08-31-2008, 07:53 PM
Sam- they're not 'blowing smoke'. You can mix in any other Golden mediums to speed it up, or mix OPEN gel, medium, and thinner into std. Golden acrylics to slow them down. I'm not sure if too many painters have had a lot of experience yet, as OPEN was only released in July, but I'm having a ball with them. I don't know about their being compatible with Liquitex, but it might work and save you from being stuck with your investment in Liquitex. I would try that by getting OPEN gel, medium and thinner to start with. As to the Matte finish issue, you could mix in some std. Golden (or maybe even Liquitex) matte medium. It would speed the OPENs up a bit, but might be worth a try. If you 'search' the acrylic forum for Golden Open Acrylics you'll find more threads on them. If you're moving West to an area of low humidity you'll really appreciate them, I think.

johnmk
08-31-2008, 08:13 PM
If anyone used this product alot do you know how well it does mix with normal goldens products?

Hi,
I needed a yellow ochre so I used Golden Heavy Body with my Opens. Pretty much as you might think—it made the mixtures thicker, faster drying and beefier overall (I used bristle brushes and prefer a thicker paint overall). I am thinking that keeping both whites (Open and HB) on the palette might be the way to go, as white is used so often, and some additional high chroma HB colors for finishing touches. Hope that helps!
johnk.

deadsam
08-31-2008, 08:23 PM
Thanks NM Painter, I am moving to Penticton (very arid part of bc) so I hear anyhow and read, so that should be good. I sold all my liquitex in a yard sale along with most of my supplies I am starting fresh so I'm thinking of just going OPEN all the way and see how they work, it seems everyone that has tried them has had nothing but good results so far, (glad they aren't blowing smoke) just in case I want a matte finish, I read the article and seen the video on their site, it seems the best paints that been made in a quite awhile.
Already checked out their colors and making a list to go paint buying the same hour I land lol.
As soon as I get back on the net out their (got to buy a computer as well, I am only taking what fits in 4 suitcases) I'll upload the results after playing with them for abit.
Should be fun and interesting since I been stuck in liquitex for eons.

Thanks John Looks like this is going to be a fun experiment for me, new place with new paints whoohoo :)

NM Painter
09-02-2008, 02:47 PM
Maybe adding a little heavy gel to the OPEN gel would give the same effect on all OPEN colors. I'll try it. The idea of having both whites on the palette is a good one too... also there isn't an OPEN zinc white so far (they're working on it), and I use it a lot for a mixing color. Mixed 50/50 with OPEN gel, it stays useable for quite a while.
I've also noticed that since OPENs don't skin over, but dry from the inside out, if you put your colors on the palette the night before you are going to use them, they have a firmer consistency... not as 'juicy/slippery' as straight out of the tube.