Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Fri, 29 Jan 1999 14:08:21 -0500 (EST)
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Sil Horwitz wrote:
> At 02:53 AM 1999/01/29 -0500, Judy wrote:
> But don't think watercolors are so very permanent. My late wife bought a
> watercolor painting that she put up in a dark hall here. It was brilliant,
> but after about ten years, the paper has become a dark ecru and the colors
> have definitely deteriorated.
Sil, I promise that had to to with the individual work. I have watercolors
from 40 years ago with no sign of deterioration (I'm the one giving signs
of deterioration). Make that 50 years. I have an envelope of Whatman
watercolor paper with the watermark "1932" in it... it was my mother's.
It is unbelieveably beautiful and although stored in what is surely a
non-archival folder, still quite white. In fact, I've often said nothing
put on it could improve it. Should be framed as is.
I just got out of my chair to check a watercolor of my own, made 40
years ago, badly framed and stuck over a radiator (which you don't even
have in Florida) by an exterior door that lets in blasts of --- uh oh!,
New-York-City air ! The colors are as bright as the day I painted it.
(And very bright they are -- the scene was wild poppies in my Nolde
phase).
My hunch would be that something in the pigments, the mount, or backing
outgassed and darkened the paper in the print you have, or the paper
itself contained the seeds of its destruction. But please, no blaming
"watercolor."
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:48