Re: [Marbling] Looks vs. reality.....
- I am with you Feridun, natural is not always better. If the synthetics behave better for marbling, or are cheaper and give the same effect, use them. The ancients would have jumped at the chance if they had it! Sometimes the natural earth pigments are better, other times not.
Cadmium red, is the closest thing in my opinion available that can closely mimic those deep Victorian Red/Maroon colors. The one I use to make paints has some chalk in it, not the pure form.... the result, since the chalk decreases the specific gravity of the cadmium, lead, is that it stays afloat longer and you get a brighter deeper red than if you use the pure pigment. At least it is true for me, and red is so problematical in marbling, always a battle (I am talking strictly water colors here), I would take anything, any how, any way, that gives that particular red.
I do have the reputation of being a die hard traditional marbler, so people are surprised by this. I am always experimenting to see what works better. Pure ultramarine... I don't know if I could afford the ground up pure lapis lazuli form, and the synthetic form works brilliantly. I don't care what the source is, I care about how the paper looks more than being a purist.
Real indigo drives me insane. I will never use it and would make it up only on special order as a paint, and even then with grave caution about its bad points. Once dry on the paper, it smears like mad unless you use tons of fixative. Bookbinders and other customers of mine would kill me! And HAVE killed me way back when I have used it and it offset onto the pages, their hands, ruined a book. I make a near equal color now myself out of materials that don't do this.
I know there is some mystique in using the pure forms of things, but as Feridun says, give me reality, give me what works best, at the least cost, with the best results. it's all about the end product anyway.
And to answer the next question that may arise, no, I have not found that the synthetics are causing ruination of the papers over time, nor do they seem to make things more acidic. Not according to my tests anyway.
----- Original Message -----
From: Feridun Ozgoren<mailto:feridun.ozgoren@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:34 PM
Subject: [Marbling] Looks vs. reality.....
Looks can be deceiving. Prussian Blue (which is a synthetic pigment) "looks
like" Lahor cividi (Indigo), but it is neither natural nor it has anything
to do with Lahor. Yes, I use water base pigments but none of them is either
"natural" or "soil" colors. There is no colorant in the classification of
pigments named as "soil colors" anyway. I am well aware of the persistent
claim that in the traditional way of Turkish marbling only natural colors
But, for example, White lead (ustubec in Turkish) was mentioned in Tertib-I
Risale-I Ebru (1608 AD) and was extensively used in traditional Turkish
marbling but it is NOT a "natural" color. In 20th and 21th century most of
"traditionalist" ebru makers in Turkey used and still are using synthetic
Yes, some of my pigments are from http://www.ayanebru.com/<http://www.ayanebru.com/> and I am very
satisfied with them, I purchase them in powder form and prepare my colors
myself. But he sells prepared ones also.
Happy new year to all.
PS. If you want to write me privately my e-mail address is
From: Marbling@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Marbling@yahoogroups.com> [mailto:Marbling@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of meltem arslan
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 4:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Marbling] Marbling Demo Video on Youtube
It looks like he was marbling by using water based natural soil and oxide
Best wishes from Istanbul,
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]