Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Help please
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Showing page 2 of 2
- 1
- 2
Message
Posted
I'm staggered, frankly. I don't suppose for a minute you want to identify the artist, but I do think people need to be warned if he doesn't change his practice radically and immediately. And I'd still like to know what this lacquer was that he used - because it has been applied over all the panels and yes - it's quite likely to carry on causing problems. Apart from that, is he confident he can repaint the affected parts without it showing? How's he expecting to be able to do that if he uses a different varnish to his wretched lacquer - because if he uses THAT again you're in for a very long relationship with him: he'll be in and out of your house for years repairing bits here and there....
Sorry if I sound annoyed when it's not even my painting, but I AM annoyed - if you're prepared to charge £1,000 for your work, you owe it to your customers AND to yourself to research your materials. Sometimes, people here think (I know they do, they drop clues!) that one or two of us worry too much about lightfastness and sound painting practice - well, everyone, here's why we do: when you sell work, you need to be confident it'll still be in good nick by the time the buyers' great grandchildren have popped their clogs, and if you can't do that you shouldn't be taking money for it.
Of course your artist didn't mean this to happen, but either he just hasn't studied his subject properly, or he cut corners to get a job finished in time: and that's just grossly unprofessional.
However, I wish you the luck you deserve, and him the luck he doesn't deserve, in resolving the problem without encountering any others.
Posted
No I totally agree with you, I am a single father of a disabled son into sci fi, I am a "professional photographer" but with LOW income so I receive working tax credits along with my carers allowance so we saved for a year for it.
As a photographer I am never going to make a fortune because I care more about doing what I do to the best of my ability that being cut throat
https://www.facebook.com/JRSPhotography.co.uk
Thank you
Posted
Just a quick further point - I've asked experts about this; consensus is that trying to clean the lacquer off is likely to take the paint film with it, but that it depends on the lacquer used - it's a rather elastic term.
What will happen to the painting over the longer term is really hard to tell - it may be that the best thing to do with it is just to leave it, wait and see. But certainly, if it starts to fail in other places I don't see why JR1 should put up with it. Sir Joshua Reynolds' paintings had a habit of falling off the canvas because of the mediums he used, but there's not really any excuse for ignorance these days - the information is out there, all you've got to do is study it.
Showing page 2 of 2
- 1
- 2