Framed properly, you shouldn’t be able to tell the difference.

I don’t think it makes any difference. In most cases the viewer would not be able to tell whether it was done on paper or panel ( with the possible exception of work done on Mi Tientes honeycomb side).

[FONT=Calibri] Ampersand is the only one I have tried. I didn’t like it nearly as much as Fisher, and it lost its tooth after repeated rubbing. I washed one down with water and a sponge and it became so smooth that it was useless for pastels.

Donald
[/FONT]

I’ve washed Pastelbord with no problem. Ampersand would probably replace a bad piece if you contact them.

I agree, no price difference in which surface you use.

And what about acrylics and oils? Why it’s better considered a traditional canvas or board than a work made in paper? (and that’s not an opinion, it’s law!)

Numerous reasons – maybe not all of them good reasons – but reasons nonetheless.

Conservators pretty much agree that in terms of longevity oils will last longest and will crack later if they are painted on the most rigid support. So, a rigid board would be the best. Traditionally oil paintings have been painted most often on canvas and boards, so that is what people (and buyers) expect. My guess is that galleries tend to choose works done on traditional supports since that is what buyers expect. Oils on paper are somewhat controversial. Some folks believe that they are just as long lasting as on canvas or board if prepared and mounted correctly. Others argue that paper is not as archival and more fragile. This may be because paper may be the surface most prone to expanding and contracting with changes in moisture and temperature – and that is one reason why oils crack.

(Nor is it law. My nearest local gallery sells many oils on paper, but I’m sure that will vary from gallery to gallery.)

My guess is that acrylics – being similar in appearance and framing to oils – have the same expectations from galleries and buyers.

That’s what I have come to learn. Whether it is accurate or not may be debatable!

Don

I’ll join the chorus for No Difference, it seems to be a preference of the painter more than the buyer. Panels work better functionally with spacers. Paper can be matted. Because I used to love doing fancy mats, I lean a bit more toward paper and matting. I’ve been planning sometime to paint something with a cutout again – parts of the painting that go outside a standard shape rectangle and need a fancy mat cut out to show the leaf that broke the border or the tree root or whatever.

I use a wide variety of surfaces for my paintings now, won’t really be sorting them by that. However, it is a very effective strategy to price by the size of the painting, come up with a size schedule that makes sense and people can plan for where they want to hang it and how big a picture frame would fit. The large sizes also make mats a huge expense in framing versus spacers, while small paintings benefit from matting to stand out more on a wall.