The Flemish method

Van EyckThere are sev­eral cur­rent paint­ing meth­ods whose prac­ti­tion­ers claim that they are work­ing just like early Flem­ish painters did. In the early 1400’s, Flem­ish and Nether­lan­dish painters (Jan van Eyck, Robert Campin, Rogier van der Wey­den, and so on) invented oil paint­ing as it is prac­ticed today. In the 19th and early 20th cen­turies, art his­to­ri­ans spent a lot of time spec­u­lat­ing about how the first oil painters prac­ticed their art. Unfor­tu­nately, they could only look at paint­ings and read old man­u­scripts. As it turns out, look­ing at paint­ings doesn’t tell you a whole lot about the meth­ods by which they were made. And the early oil painters didn’t, so far as we know, write down their valu­able trade secrets for schol­ars hun­dereds of years later to study.

So most of what you will see about “Flem­ish” paint­ing meth­ods, although some­times used by very skilled artists, is basi­cally what some 19th cen­tury Ger­man aca­d­e­mics erro­neously thought North­ern Euro­pean paint­ing was. There is one school that alter­nates lay­ers of egg-oil emul­sion white with lay­ers of oil glazes in pri­mary col­ors. Another school calls for each paint­ing to be made in seven lay­ers, each of which dries for seven weeks (are we artists or numerologists?).

The rea­son why peo­ple are so fas­ci­nated by early Flem­ish paint­ings is that they are so remark­able. First, although they are very, very old, they are often in much bet­ter shape than oil paint­ings that are hun­dreds of years younger (many early 20th cen­tury paint­ings have dete­ri­o­rated more than paint­ings from the 15th cen­tury). Sec­ond, the paint­ings glow with a sense of vital­ity that is sel­dom seen in more recent paint­ings. They have a qual­ity that is often described as “jewel-like.” This is espe­cially evi­dent if you see them in per­son; it’s easy to pick out the Flem­ish paint­ings from those done in other peri­ods, or those from the same period done in other places. The pre­cise detail and gor­geous col­ors are mar­velous to look at.

The thing is, we now know a lot more about early Flem­ish paint­ing meth­ods than we used to, because mod­ern tech­ni­cal analy­sis pro­vides a lot more infor­ma­tion. So I can, with rea­son­able author­ity, describe actual “Flem­ish” paint­ing meth­ods, which were gen­er­ally much sim­pler than those taught in spe­cial classes where the “Secrets of the Old Mas­ters” are revealed.

The North­ern Euro­pean paint­ings we have are almost entirely done on panel, not because can­vas wasn’t used, but because panel paint­ings are the ones that have lasted. The pan­els were made of local hard­woods such as oak. They are often quite small; the large ones were made with sev­eral planks fas­tened together. The pan­els were planed to a smooth fin­ish and then sea­soned (usu­ally for sev­eral years). They were then coated in hide glue, which is a gelatin that becomes liq­uid when heated. Then an ini­tial prim­ing was applied that con­sisted of warm hide glue mixed with chalk (cal­cium car­bon­ate). This prim­ing was applied in sev­eral lay­ers, allowed to dry, then sanded or scraped smooth. The mod­ern word for a prim­ing layer like this is “gesso,” although tech­ni­cally gesso was the Ital­ian ver­sion, made from hide glue mixed with gyp­sum (cal­cium sul­fate). Mod­ern acrylic primer is often labelled “gesso,” but that’s totally incor­rect. Any­one caught refer­ring to acrylic primer as gesso will be required to stay after school and write “gesso is not made with plas­tic” 1000 times on the chalkboard.

There were very few pig­ments avail­able at the time to make paint with, although that lim­i­ta­tion is not obvi­ous from look­ing at old mas­ter paint­ings. The avail­able col­ors included ultra­ma­rine blue (very expen­sive as it had to be imported from Afghanistan and then labo­ri­ously refined), azu­rite blue (sort of like a cobalt blue), red lake (sim­i­lar to alizarin crim­son), lead tin yel­low (sim­i­lar to Naples yel­low), ver­mil­lion (sim­i­lar to cad­mium red), bone black (sim­i­lar to what is now, incor­rectly, called “ivory” black), flake white, cop­per green (sim­i­lar to virid­ian), and var­i­ous earth col­ors (sim­i­lar to mod­ern ochres, sien­nas, and green earths). Paint was made by hand, usu­ally that morn­ing or the day before, by appren­tices and stu­dio assis­tants. If you haven’t tried oil paint made fresh by hand, it is more fluid than the stuff you get today in tubes.

In the early 15th cen­tury, oil painters prob­a­bly didn’t use sol­vents such as spir­its of tur­pen­tine or oil of spike. This demostrates that it is quite pos­si­ble to apply oil paint with very fine pre­ci­sion with­out hav­ing to thin it down. It’s eas­ier to do this kind of work with hand­made paint than with tube oil colors.

This method involves mul­ti­ple lay­ers that are allowed to dry in between appli­ca­tions. In some cases, lower lay­ers were done in egg tem­pera, switch­ing to oil later on in the sequence. Flesh tones were painted very thinly, in one or two lay­ers. The mod­ern oil paint­ing approach (mostly devel­oped in Flo­rence in the early 16th cen­tury) empha­sizes thin, trans­par­ent darks and thick, opaque lights. By com­par­i­son, early North­ern Euro­pean paint­ing was pri­mar­ily a glaz­ing method in which darks were estab­lished with thick lay­ers of trans­par­ent paint. This allows the darks to have a sense of depth and color that is not pos­si­ble in direct (sin­gle layer) paint­ing. Glaz­ing is typ­i­cally done over a layer of opaque paint of sim­i­lar color; red lake over ver­mil­lion, for exam­ple. Black, since it tends to pro­duce dull mix­tures, is not used except to darken earth col­ors (most artists think that the idea of avoid­ing black was invented by the impres­sion­ists, but no). Instead, darks are cre­ated by thick glazes and by what we would today rec­og­nize as com­ple­men­tary color mix­tures (red lake could be dark­ened with ultra­ma­rine, for example).

Here’s one pos­si­ble recon­struc­tion of the paint­ing sequence:
  1. Make a detailed draw­ing on paper and trans­fer it to a ges­soed panel. Rein­force and elab­o­rate the draw­ing with ink or dark paint. North­ern Euro­pean artists usu­ally made very detailed underdrawings.
  2. The ini­tial layer of paint, called the primuersel, is used to define the dark areas of the paint­ing. The primuersel color is made by mix­ing black with earth tones such as red or yel­low ochre; it is there­fore sim­i­lar to the ver­dac­cio used for flesh tones in the tra­di­tional Ital­ian egg tem­pera method (but with­out a green earth under­paint­ing and not just in flesh tones). This layer was prob­a­bly often done in egg tem­pera or tem­pera grassa. Either way, this layer should be used to define form, edges, shad­ows, and other darks through­out the painting.
  3. Now apply the basic col­ors to each area of the paint­ing, start­ing to work up mod­el­ing of forms with opaque col­ors but avoid­ing fine detail. This stage is called “dead col­or­ing.” As with primuersel, some artists used egg tem­pera or tem­pera grassa for this layer. Flesh tones can be begun with mixed tones using appro­pri­ate brown or pink mix­tures of white, ver­mil­lion, and earth col­ors. In light areas, keep the paint as thin as you can; you want the white of the gesso to show through. X-ray scans show that lead white was often used only to empha­size the bright­est high­lights of flesh tones, with a very thin ton­ing of the gesso used for most light areas of flesh. This approach keeps light areas bright and avoids later yel­low­ing by min­i­miz­ing the amount of oil. In shadow areas, don’t worry so much about paint thick­ness, but keep the sur­face of the paint smooth. In areas that will later be glazed, keep light areas lighter than the intended final effect, since glazes will darken what they cover. When you have taken this stage as far as you can, let the paint dry once again.
  4. If you began the paint­ing in egg tem­pera or tem­pera grassa, you will switch to pure oil paint no later than when dead col­or­ing is com­pleted. Use paints ground in lin­seed oil. When switch­ing from tem­pera to oil paint, you may choose to apply a very thin layer of oil to pre­vent exces­sive absorp­tion by the tem­pera under­lay­ers. From now on, you will let each layer dry thor­oughly before fur­ther paint­ing. If the lay­ers are thin, this will take up to sev­eral days each time, depend­ing on the pig­ments you use and whether the paint con­tains sicca­tives. It may be help­ful to wet sand in between lay­ers as needed to main­tain a sur­face that is thin and smooth.
  5. You will now work each area of the paint­ing toward the intended final fin­ish. Where desired, you can either thin the paint slightly with medium (oil mixed with a var­nish or bal­sam) or put a very thin layer of medium onto the sur­face and paint onto that. Apply fine detail to light areas. Areas of dark or bright col­ors, espe­cially those around the main areas of inter­est, can be glazed. So, for exam­ple, a red robe, after a primuersel of black mixed with red ochre and then ini­tial opaque mod­el­ing with ver­mil­lion and white, could then be glazed with a trans­par­ent red lake, using fin­gers, a rag, or a soft brush to make the glaze very thin over the lights and thicker over the darks. A lit­tle ultra­ma­rine or indigo could be glazed in to neu­tral­ize and rein­force the darker shad­ows. Mul­ti­ple glazes can be applied (allow the paint to dry and wet sand in between lay­ers) until a clear sense of three-dimensional depth has been achieved, gen­er­ally with inky darks, intense mid­tones, and bright lights. This process can be very time con­sum­ing, espe­cially if you are not using sicca­tives, but it pro­duces a strik­ing effect that is imme­di­ately notice­able when com­par­ing Flem­ish oil paint­ings to other work of the period.
  6. The final stages would be used pri­mar­ily for detail work and to apply thin scum­bles of opaque color mixed with white where needed over lighter areas of glazed color. Again, sand between coats. It is pos­si­ble that some fine details were applied with egg tem­pera, worked into wet oil paint. This devel­op­ment of detail would con­tinue until a very high degree of fin­ish was obtained.

Tags: , , ,

  1. Peter Berndt’s avatar

    Very nice account of the Flem­ish paint­ing process. Very Inter­est­ing!
    Peter Berndt

    Reply

  2. Dorothea von Eckhardt’s avatar

    Inter­est­ing, Infor­ma­tive les­son in flem­ish paint­ing. I am an oil painter that may com­bine the two mediums.

    Reply

  3. Kate Wilson’s avatar

    Fas­ci­nat­ing! Thanks for sharing!

    Reply

  4. TIm Jee’s avatar

    Accord­ing to my book on 15th Flem­ish paint­ing in the National Gallery, x ray’s reveal that a lot of the paint­ings didn’t have highly devel­oped under­draw­ings or under­paint­ings. some of the draw­ing under the paint­ing is quite loose and hastily done which only goes to make the process by which the highly fin­ished paint­ing was done, even more baf­fling. These paint­ings are often referred to as being “jewel’ like and used to jus­tify the heavy use of glazes to dupli­cate these paint­ings. Any­body who has seen these paint­ings in the flesh can­not fail but to notice the curi­ous OPACITY in the colours which adds to the sense of for­mal integrity. One can see this opac­ity in the head­ress of Robert Campins “woman”. The method­ol­ogy of the final fine detail­ing is also baf­fling. Try dupli­cat­ing it with just lin­seed oil (as this is often claimed as the sole medium by many cur­rent art con­ser­va­tors) and see how far you get.

    Reply

  5. David’s avatar

    Tim,

    Which book is that?

    Reply

  6. Greg’s avatar

    Its worth look­ing at this chap’s work when talk­ing about the flem­ish style, a Russ­ian who cur­rently sticks to a very struc­tured Flem­ish process, inter­est­ing see­ing the com­par­isons to your write up.

    http://​www​.antono​vart​.com/

    A free workshop;

    http://​art​papa​.net/​c​o​n​t​e​n​t​/​v​i​e​w​/​28​/​54/

    Reply

  7. David’s avatar

    Greg,

    I just can’t get past the whole seven lay­ers, each of which takes seven weeks to dry thing. Artists are not numerol­o­gists; nor were they in the early 15th cen­tury. They were pro­fes­sion­als attempt­ing to deliver a mar­ketable prod­uct in a man­ner that allowed them to earn a liv­ing. There was no room for such silli­ness in their busi­ness model.

    Antonov is not doing any­thing like what mod­ern art mate­ri­als sci­en­tists under­stand early Flem­ish paint­ing to be. He appears to be doing an approx­i­ma­tion of what one school of 19th cen­tury aca­d­e­mics thought early Flem­ish paint­ing was. They were tak­ing their best guess based on very lim­ited infor­ma­tion, but they were wrong.

    That’s not to say there’s any­thing wrong with his paint­ing method, if you like being really anal about the way you paint. The work on his web­site seems kind of nice. But it’s not early Flemish—it’s mod­ern Russian.

    Reply

  8. Greg’s avatar

    The main­stream would prob­a­bly label any time con­sumed in the pur­suit of longevity being anal in this age of cookie cut­ter abstracts so I sup­pose I was assum­ing that the more anal you get the longer the paint­ing lasts. I am per­son­ally try­ing to make a bal­ance between Flem­ish con­ser­va­tion and 19th cen­tury speed of exe­cu­tion. Being inter­ested in cur­rent inter­na­tional and polit­i­cal events, the seven, seven ideal just isn’t cricket. On the sub­ject of con­ser­va­tion, does an exten­sive amount of lay­ers have a strong effect on longevity either way beyond the adher­ence to fat and lean? Can’t seem to stum­ble across any­thing on it.

    Reply

  9. David’s avatar

    Greg,

    Direct paint­ing, in one layer, cre­ates a sim­pler and there­fore more sta­ble paint film than paint­ing in many lay­ers. The more lay­ers added, the greater the risk of one layer fail­ing to adhere reli­ably to the layer beneath it. So fewer lay­ers, at least in the­ory, is likely to pro­duce longer-lasting paintings.

    Here’s a post from this weblog on mak­ing paint­ings last a long time.

    Reply

  10. Tim Jee’s avatar

    @David
    Hello David,
    For­got I’d posted the com­ment so sorry for the delay in replaying….(that’s if you get to read this!!!)….the book is “The Fif­teenth Cen­tury Nether­lan­dish paint­ings” by Lorne Camp­bell. It’s pub­lished by National Gallery cat­a­logues (Lon­don). Its a very good book but expen­sive. I haven’t got the time at the moment to go into detail, but the 7 layer method is nonsense…I mean his­tor­i­cally. Com­pare the tightly painted fee­ble paint­ings pro­duced by mod­ern prac­tion­ers of this method with the mas­ters of the flem­ish tra­tidi­ton and you’ll see a world of dif­fer­ence. There are a lot of myths like this about. Rather like the the­ory that Egg Tem­pera paint­ings were all painted over highly com­pleted ink or mono­chrome paint­ings. Once again, mod­ern x ray analy­sis shows that this ( in most cases)simply isnt true. Sorry if this sounds opin­ion­ated but there are a LOT of mis­con­cep­tions about the most likely method­ol­ogy of renais­sance painters.

    Reply

    1. David’s avatar

      @Tim Jee -
      Thanks, Tim. That book is on my “want to buy” list. In terms of his­tor­i­cal paint­ing meth­ods, the “7 layer” approach is cer­tainly hogwash.

      And you are of course right that the asser­tion (orig­i­nat­ing with Daniel V. Thomp­son) that Ital­ian tem­pera tech­nique relied on a detailed under­draw­ing is com­pletely inac­cu­rate. (Though in the 1930’s it was a rea­son­able hypothesis.)

      Reply

  11. Tim Jee’s avatar

    @David — I think I ought to qual­ify what I wrote in the above. Highly fin­ished ink under­paintigs may have been prac­ticed
    by some artists…well at least by Cenini!..and I think the Daniel Thomp­son book on tem­pera paint­ing is a mar­velous lit­tle book …one of my favourites. The prob­lem is how­ever that peo­ple latch on to these meth­ods as if they are the one and only “cor­rect way” to paint, or that one has to use this method to repli­cate the look of paintigs from cer­tain peri­ods. Cer­tainly, I’ve seen plenty of tem­pera paint­ings from C15th that don’t appear to have any ink or dark under­paint­ing. How­ever , as a method in its own right, why not try it. I’m cur­rently exper­i­ment­ing with dif­fer­ent coloured under­paint­ings in my own tem­pera paint­ings. The other great book on Tem­pera paint­ing is the Robert Vick­ery “new tec­n­niques in egg termpera ” (no longer in print but eas­ily avail­able). I imag­ine his more impro­vised approach to the medium is closer to Andrew Wyeths.
    Flem­ish paint­ings have fas­ci­nated me for a while because of their par­tic­u­lar paint qual­ity. East­lake seems fairly con­vinced that they used hard resins and cer­tainly they have a look sim­i­lar to some of Hol­man Hunt’s paint­ings who def­i­nitely used Copal resin. ( Oh there’s another myth bit­ing the dust…Copal being ban­ished these days because it turns the paint­ing yel­low and causes cracking…Hunt’s paint­ings are over 150 year’s old and are in beau­ti­ful con­di­tion)…
    The book on Nether­lan­ish paint­ings that I have is very detailed from the con­ser­va­tors point of view. I wouldn’t get it unless you’re a completist..it’s too expen­sive ..it’s really for those of a nerdish dis­posi­ton who enjoy the min­u­tae of inves­ti­ga­tions into paint­ings, (that’ll be me!). I have the other National gallery books “Ital­ian paint­ings before 1400” and ” From Giotto to Durer” which are paper­back, cheaper, and more gen­eral but full of inter­est­ing stuff on the cur­rent under­stand­ing of these paint­ings. You may have already seen them. I’m cur­rently after “The Panel paint­ings of Masolino and Masac­cio: The art of Tech­nique”.
    And now, back in the real world…an acquain­tance of mine picked up a paint­ing in an junk/antique shop that looked like an early Raphael..Not quite as good but beau­ti­fully done with superb sub­tle paint han­dling around the face and hands. It really looked gen­uine. How­ever I man­aged to bring to bear the knowl­edge I’ve acquired over the years to dis­cern that it was indeed a fake. What were the tell-tell signs? you might I ask. Well. prob­a­bly the words “Win­sor & New­ton” printed in large let­ters on the back!

    Reply

  12. David’s avatar

    @Tim Jee

    Tim,

    I think we’re both clear on the role of under­draw­ings and under­paint­ings in Renais­sance Ital­ian tem­pera paint­ings. Thomp­son was a bril­liant guy, but he didn’t have the ben­e­fit of mod­ern tech­ni­cal analy­sis. I have not read Vickrey’s book; I should prob­a­bly pick it up some­time. I do like much of his work quite a lot.

    Mayer did a great job trash­ing copal. Of course, there are many dif­fer­ent kinds of copal, some of which prob­a­bly do cause the paint­ing to turn yel­low, crack, explode, and cor­rupt chil­dren to the dark side of the force.

    I am cer­tainly of the nerdish dis­po­si­tion when it comes to 15th cen­tury paint­ing meth­ods. I have the other books, except for Masolino/Masaccio. That one’s on my list.

    I read some­where that Win­sor and New­ton were very active back in the Renais­sance, or Vic­to­rian period, or one of those olden times. So maybe it’s real…

    Reply

  13. jeff’s avatar

    This descrip­tion of the method is very inter­est­ing, David. I have been doing some­thing sim­i­lar with­out really know­ing the pit­falls. I have found that the under­draw­ing is really not really that impor­tant in terms of its detail with this approach. The grad­ual lay­er­ing means that it sim­ply gets lost and refined any­way. The grad­ual nature of the approach means that it becomes quite easy to get strong real­ism from some­thing that is orig­i­nally very crude.

    I do have a ques­tion or two though.
    1. With wet sand­ing: is that just a case of lightly refresh­ing the sur­face and giv­ing it tooth or a reassert­ing of the lights as well? How nec­es­sary is it?
    2. You don’t men­tion it but I have found sig­nif­i­cant prob­lems with oil absorp­tion into the ground that regard­less of lay­er­ing means that the final paint­ing needs var­nish­ing. Is var­nish­ing impor­tant in this method or am I miss­ing something?

    Reply

  14. Playskull’s avatar

    How did they man­age to achieve such smooth sur­faces which have a car enamel fin­ish? Raw Lin­seed oil and pig­ment grinded together tend to pro­duce brush strokes. The addi­tion of stand oil helps because it lev­els out brush strokes due to its vis­cos­ity but stand oil can­not be grinded with. Maybe it had to due with the method of appli­ca­tion. Is it even pos­si­ble to make a gra­da­tion in oil with­out any turpentine?

    Reply

  15. David’s avatar

    @Playskull

    Playskull,

    Have you ever made your own fresh oil paint? It’s not the same stuff you get from a tube. It is much more man­age­able with a brush, and you can adjust it’s work­ing prop­er­ties by adding dif­fer­ent amounts of oil, grind­ing for dif­fer­ent amounts of time, etc.

    Stand oil wasn’t avail­able in the 15th and early 16th cen­turies. Heat-bodied oil, which has prop­er­ties that are sim­i­lar, but not iden­ti­cal, was. There were many recipes for prepar­ing oil that cer­tainly had an effect on its characteristics.

    Reply

  16. jeff’s avatar

    I’d have to agree with David. Home­made oil paint is not nec­es­sar­ily sub­ject to brush­marks. As for need­ing tur­pen­tine to get a grad­u­a­tion, that is not at all needed. A drop of oil is all it takes to make the paint blend easily.

    Reply

  17. Playskull’s avatar

    Very true. Its cer­tainly not the same as tube paint. Tube paints have a uni­for­mity across dif­fer­ent pig­ments. Hand grinded paints have less uni­for­mi­ties across dif­fer­ent pig­ments. Ultra­ma­rine is stringy, bone black is gritty, lead white is mag­i­cally but­tery.
    I always look at my paint­ings glare from an angle to see how smooth my paints look in a glare. I always have trou­ble get­ting bone black smooth. I tried grind­ing it twice as long as other pig­ments. I am cur­rently exper­i­ment­ing with lamp black and its cer­tainly smoother :)
    As for the brush stroke lev­el­ing issue. I have had some suc­cess with sun thick­ened oil. It lev­els paint a bit less than boiled stand oil etc. I spread my paint on acid free paper to soak out extra oil and replace it with some sun thick­ened or stand oil
    My newest issue is dust. My paint­ings are mostly under 15 inches so dust is an issue. By the way fel­las, never elec­tric shave your face before paint­ing. I learned the hard way. @David -

    Reply

  18. Koren’s avatar

    A few tech­ni­cal ques­tions about the method you out­line here. First, when you refer to the primuersel as a mix­ture of black and an earth, I’m assum­ing here that you’re describ­ing essen­tially a mono­chrome approach (one earth added to black, to mod­ify the hue and/or value) with no white added at this stage, cor­rect? Sec­ond, when mov­ing from the primuersel stage to the body color stage, is the paint­ing allowed to dry com­pletely between those two phases? If not, doesn’t the body color become some­what muddy with the (at least par­tial) mix­ing of the earth/black mix­ture and the local color? Or is the earth/black mix­ture con­fined to only the dark­est value areas of the paint­ing, so that the body color is used to model the mid– and high-value areas and there is rel­a­tively lit­tle mix­ing between the two areas? To me, these are fine but essen­tial distinctions…

    Reply

  19. David’s avatar

    @Koren

    Koren,

    The ini­tial detail layer was often done in mono­chrome. This would often be on top of a lightly applied mono­chrome ton­ing layer to change the white of the gesso panel to a grey. It may be that this ton­ing layer was also used to reduce the absorbency of the gesso to make it eas­ier to apply the next lay­ers of paint.

    No one absolutely knows how the lay­er­ing worked, but my assump­tion is that they allowed lay­ers to dry com­pletely before apply­ing more paint.

    Reply

  20. Tim Jee’s avatar

    @jeff — Jeff,

    If you’re paint­ing on a real gesso panel, a light wash of rab­bit skin glue before you begin to paint, helps to seal it and reduce the absorp­tion of the oil.

    Reply

  21. David’s avatar

    @Tim Jee

    Tim,

    I, too, gen­er­ally use a layer of hide glue to pre­pare tra­di­tional gesso for oil paint. It’s unnec­es­sary for tempera.

    Reply

  22. Koren’s avatar

    Thanks for the response to my pre­vi­ous ques­tion. I thought as much, but it was still nice to get an answer. I have a related ques­tion that I thought I’d ask — I’ve been read­ing about glaz­ing meth­ods, and under­stand that the pre­vi­ous paint layer must be dry before a glaze can be applied. What’s not clear is HOW dry — does it need to be com­pletely dry to the touch (as you’d get after 24 weeks) or com­pletely dry period (mean­ing 6 months or more)? Based on what I’ve read from other artists the answer seems to vary greatly. I guess I thought ini­tially that fol­low­ing fat over lean would ensure that the upper lay­ers wouldn’t crack even if the lower lay­ers were still oxi­diz­ing when the upper ones were applied. Any guid­ance here would be appreciated.

    Thanks,

    KLF Minneapolis

    Reply

  23. David’s avatar

    @Koren

    Koren,

    If it were nec­es­sary to wait 6 months between lay­ers, very few multi-layer paint­ings would have ever been com­pleted. Oxi­diz­ing is not com­pleted for many decades, so there is no prac­ti­cal point at which you can apply more paint after lower lay­ers are done with expand­ing and con­tract­ing. That’s one rea­son why fat over lean is important.

    Wait until the under-layer is fully dry to the touch. If the under­layer is very smooth and shiny, then do some­thing to improve mechan­i­cal adhe­sion, such as wet sand­ing or oil­ing out with a thin layer of medium con­tain­ing a balsam.

    Reply

  24. Koren’s avatar

    Thanks much for this reply! I assumed this was true, but it’s nice to have con­fir­ma­tion from some­one with experience.

    Also, I apol­o­gize in advance for the rant I posted on your ‘con­ve­nience paints’ page regard­ing paint­ing mate­ri­als and health. To any­one inter­ested in the indi­rect method who would like to find a more health-friendly sol­vent for the ‘lean’ lay­ers, I just dis­cov­ered a new W&N Arti­san thin­ner prod­uct that’s made from dipropy­lene gly­col monomethyl ether — after a lit­tle research rel­a­tive to both OMS and turps this appears to be lower tox­i­c­ity . (I’m not affil­i­ated with any paint com­pany, just like to avoid any­thing toxic when­ever possible.)

    Thanks again!

    Reply

  25. David’s avatar

    @Koren

    Koren,

    Thanks for the info. The “rant” was per­fectly appropriate.

    Reply

  26. Rita Thompson’s avatar

    would a mod­ern exam­ple of a theme in these paint­ings be a polit­i­cal hero being in the back­ground of a gathering

    Reply