Re: Marshall's Photo Paints?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thank you, Louie.  I've tried the pencils, and you are right - they are effective.  I have a difficult time, though, when trying to cover a large area.  I should just use smaller photographs, huh?  {:->
 
Marilyn
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"It is never too late to be what you might have been."  George Eliot
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 1:25 PM
Subject: RE: Marshall's Photo Paints?

Marilyn ?

 

Ordinary oils are opaque and can obscure the underlying photograph.  However, if they are applied with a very light hand, they can result in very pleasant pastel colors with enough of the underlying image still showing through.  Also, there are transparentizing gel additives that supposedly make them less opaque.

 

I share your frustration with Marshall?s oils.  Actually, I have found that pencils are a much easier solution.

 

Louie


From: owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marilyn Dalrymple
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 3:45 PM
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: Marshall's Photo Paints?

 

Can anyone here give me a reason why I shouldn't use a good brand of regular artist's oil paints instead of Marshall's Photo Oils for hand coloring photographs?

 

The tiny tubes of Marshall's, that split open and squirt paint everywhere when I try to twist off a stuck tube lid, have caused me to run out of patience.

 

Marilyn

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"It is never too late to be what you might have been."  George Eliot


[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux