Varnished Watercolors

Elisha Dasenbrock wrote

on 9 Apr 2011 10:30 PM

TJHS,

Okay, you win for the definition of discriminate.

I'm not saying you should join an organization only to change it, however, if (and it seemed to be the case from your original post) you feel that you would like to be accepted into their organization on your terms, then why wouldn't you want to see it changed?  As I said though, that's only one option.

If you feel strongly enough about the validity of varnished watercolors I don't see a problem with working to have them accepted by and added to the AWS standards no matter how you do it. I would find it a very respectable cause actually.  It's one thing to argue it in a forum and another to make real change.  

It read a little like pouting.

Elisha Dasenbrock wrote

on 9 Apr 2011 10:34 PM

Although I will add that your usage of discriminate, the comparing it to discriminating based on gender especially, to be a bit confusing. It's much more serious of an offense than just based on how it is presented. Like I said, you don't have to varnish your watercolors, but I can't change my sex.  I would have probably gone with a synonym. 

Elisha Dasenbrock wrote

on 10 Apr 2011 9:17 PM

I meant to add this to the last message, but I was pretty distracted last night. 

I also don't think that they are necessarily setting up those boundaries, "to make a distinction in favor of or against a person or thingon the basis of the group, class, or category to which the person or

thing belongs rather than according to actual merit."

 Although they may consider it to be multi-media instead of watercolor, I don't think it's your personal merit, but perhaps the merit of the artwork. If they see the varnishing of the painting as being inherently wrong to the integrity of the watercolor painting by the society's pre-set definition then it's not a matter of discrimination, but differentiation. 

Paul Sullivan wrote

on 11 Apr 2011 11:05 AM

I am sure that the reason for the restrictions against varnish on watercolors is, to some extent, a means of maintaining the traditional definition of watercolor. However, I believe there are more reasons than that for the specification of "no varnish"—at least at this time.

Now almost all of the national watercolor exhibitions sponsored by the various watercolor societies throughout the country accept all water based media. However, most of these societies originated for the exclusive purpose of promoting watercolor as a method of painting. It is not surprising then that many of the entry rules and criteria for judging are more applicable to traditional watercolor. During the judging process of traditional watercolor, one of the points considered is how much of the natural clarity and brilliance of transparent watercolor has been maintained through the mixing and painting process. Varnish can alter the appearance of a painting—enhance the color to some extent.  If all the paintings are unvarnished it makes for a more level playing field — at least for the judging process. 

This is the way it is at this time. Chances are, these restrictions will change with time. The restrictions against varnish should not hurt the personal principles of anyone. These shows are a method of showcasing your best work. It would be a shame to not take advatage of them.

I have a few gripes of my own. I've had to have paintings re-matted three times and on another occasion I had to have a picture reframed and re-matted in order to comply with exhibition specifications. 

Paul Sullivan

http://www.paulsullivanstudio.com

sparkzy wrote

on 3 Nov 2011 10:12 PM

I am beginning with watercolour to add an alternative to my oil painting and am most interested to learn the method, steps, materials, etc to varnish some of my watercolours. would Lori or someone else please provide me with the necessary information. I live in an idylic rural australian area with much great scenery to paint and I make my own high quality frames, but I want to avoid the mat & glass arrangement in doing my framing. Cheers , Trevor

sueswatercolor wrote

on 3 Jan 2012 4:17 PM

Getting back to the original question... I agree with you totally, Mr. Sullivan.. watercolor should never be varnished... I relish the surface of papers... I've been selling my 400 pound Indian Khadi paper floated, without  glass or plexi over it...  people buy my paintings BECAUSE they love the texture of the paper...   varnish is not for watercolor.

Paul Sullivan wrote

on 4 Jan 2012 3:19 PM

Hi Sue,