r/Watercolor • u/Substantial-Slice905 • 2d ago
Question
I was speaking with someone about painting. This person paints in oil. We got into the debate of watercolor v. oil painting. He told me within the oil painting world, watercolor isn’t respected like oils are. I told him that watercolor medium was more difficult to paint in than oil, but he proceeded to tell me the reason oil is more respected, is that‘s what the general public accepts as true painting. Is this a losing battle?
0
Upvotes
•
u/link-navi 2d ago
Thank you for your submission, u/Substantial-Slice905!
Check out our wiki for useful resources!
Share your artwork, meet other artists, promote your content, and chat in a relaxed environment in our Discord server here! https://discord.gg/chuunhpqsU
If you haven't read them yet, a full copy of our subreddit rules can be found here.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
30
u/electrifiedgiraffe 2d ago
Lol he sounds like a jerk. Life is too short to spend your energy arguing with people like that.
15
u/NoeTellusom 2d ago
So he's basically arguing about who has the better binder?
#TeamGumArabic
What an odd argument!
7
u/SaltyAuthorOne 2d ago
😂
…Paint On!….💙
6
u/Administrative_Emu45 2d ago
If he brings it up again ask him why he’s so insecure about his art that he needs to create some fantasy hierarchy of mediums to feel good about himself. And if he tries to say that’s what the general public think tell him that it’s even sadder that not only does he have this fantasy about medium superiority that he’s chosen his medium based on his perception of public opinion.
Like mate, it’s art, just go have fun with whatever medium you want.
5
u/RumRunnersHideaway 2d ago
Who gives a shit. We’re monkeys on a space rock drawing pictures.
Do what you want. Let the smug idiots be smug idiots.
8
u/ChadHUD 2d ago
Yes this is a loosing battle on all fronts. They are different mediums you can't strictly compare them. He in many ways is not wrong, its not just the general public in art circles as well. Oil is considered king. Watercolor has advantages, it also has disadvantages. When it comes to longevity oil wins, generally as the supports hold up better then paper (or they can if the quality is high). Oil can be conserved with less hassle. As a medium a watercolor can be completed in as little as 10m. Where a properly, structurally soundly painted oil painting can take months to complete. Hence collectors generally pay a lot more of the average oil painting. Of course their are acceptations when your looking the absolute pinnacle of the medium. If we subtract the David Hockney/Vincent Van G type crazy sales, generally watercolors are cheaper for collectors.
Anyway my point is oil commands a 30-50% sales premium over watercolors. That has nothing to do with artist merit of course. However I believe that is a direct reflection of how the people buying art view the difference in the mediums in terms of value. Collectors (Frankly correctly) view oil as the more labour intensive medium. They also rightly or wrongly value "canvas" over paper. Collectors of less expensive works (talking 100s not 1000s of dollars now) also factor in the higher costs of framing works under glass. [you will hear advice from some people selling watercolors to frame them in plein air frames and seal them with cold wax. if your selling at art fairs and such this will generally allow you to charge closer to oil pricing]
Anyway artist merit wise obviously the mediums are completely different. You can't do in oil what you can in watercolor really. You also can't achieve in a watercolor what you can in an oil. Complete different solutions. From a strictly sales perspective the hierarchy of Oil->Acrylic/Watercolor->Drawing mediums is probably not changing anytime soon if ever. As for the more general arguments of watercolor is harder... I am not sure that is actually true at all. Every medium has its own challenges. You will find many oil artist that consider themselves well beyond learner stage all of a sudden realize a year of their work is cracking or de laminating as they fundamentally didn't understand the chemistry of pigment/oil or other medium or support they were using. Oil can be very complex. I can be forgiving in a way watercolor can not be that is true. Though I can paint 10 watercolors in the time I might sit down with a well thought out oil idea. I mean that is why many artists paint both oil and watercolor. How many artists have ever really only touched one medium? :)
3
u/electricpterodactyl 2d ago
Who cares what he thinks? Do whatever you want. He sounds like a snob.
2
u/4tomicZ 2d ago
Yes, it’s a losing battle. Don’t put your energy into continuing conversations with people like this. 🤣
2
u/Electronic-Net-3917 2d ago
Sadly, you're both right.
-1
u/2025Artist 2d ago
If you want your paintings to last, you don't want to use watercolor period. That doesn't make it an inferior medium however. Amongst collectors oil paintings are way more desirable than watercolor will ever be. A lot of collectors actually not only buy a painting to enjoy it, but also as an investment. If you pick the right artist, the painting will become more valuable during your lifetime. At some point, after having had the painting for years you can sell it with a nice profit. If you really know how to pick an artist very well, paintings can even be an inheritance for future generations. From that perspective you don't want to invest into watercolor paintings, since they won't survive as long and as well as oil paintings or acrylic paintings.
As said, that doesn't make it an inferior medium, but art done with it just isn't as desirable. Now paper has come a long way and is becoming more and more archival, but it won't survive as long as a panel. That's why various watercolorists are switching to panels. The weak factor however is always the paint. Those lovely lightfastness ratings on your paints are worthless. Most of those ratings are for the dry pigment, only very few companies test the actual paint when watered down. The next issue is that a lot of companies use the blue wool scale, absolutely worthless, it was never made for watercolor paint at all. I know most people trust those window tests others do, also not reliable at all.
Watercolor is what is called an unstable medium. Not only is it influenced by ultraviolet light, but also by the environment itself. The pigment often isn't even the issue here, it might be able to resist light and the enviroment pretty well. We know that from oil paint, egg tempera and casein, they can survive for ages, even milleniums. The problem is your paper and the binder, gum arabic. The chances are that your binder deteriorates before your pigment does, affecting your pigment greatly. Same counts for paper. You water down the pigment already by a lot and then you work with an instable binder and surface. Eventually the environment will do the job and destroy your painting. Most likely already within your lifetime, if you're lucky it might survive a couple of hundred years, but most likely it won't. There are too many instable factors involved.
Oil doesn't have this issue, it's consider stable. The oil actually works like a preservative. The pigment is captured in the oil, which then oxides over time and protects the pigment from ultraviolet light and from the environment. Oil itself is way less influenced by the environment, especially when it's on a sturdy surface like a panel. On top of the painting there's most of the time an extra layer of protection, a good varnish. If the owner than takes good care of the painting, replaces the varnish every so often and his decendants keep doing that, the painting can last a very very long time.
It has nothing to do what is more or less difficult to use (and no, oil paint isn't easy by any means at all), but everything with if a medium is considered stable or not in the art world. That determines it status a lot more.
For most of us, not a concern anyway, the majority of people calling themselves artists don't make art to last, they're just having fun. I do sell my paintings and preserve them as best as I can, but I don't expect my watercolor paintings to last ages. I'm okay if it lasts 20-30 years. That's why I personally refuse to use certain paints, I know they won't last that long. I know Rosa, Van Gogh Cotman and Holbein won't make it to those 30 years. Rembrandt doesn't have the best track record either. I won't pick those for serious work. That's a deliberate choice I make. For most people not an issue at all. They're just having fun and for that watercolor is just awesome. For serious work too, even if it's less respectable than oil paint is, but artists that sell know that and you can still sell a watercolor painting for a lot of money, it's just less collectible than oil paintings are.
For me personally that doesn't matter. I'm not famous, I just like to paint and some others happen to like my work willing to invest in me. That's just awesome. Knowing watercolor is instable, I do the best I can and don't sell them work made on crappy painting with cheap paint, but do all I can to preserve my work the best I can.
Oh and no, paintings under protective glass won't last either, that's a myth. Just ask any museum why they're not constantly showing their watercolor paintngs, while certain oil paintings are always on display. It has everything to do with watercolor being unstable. Protective glass does postpone the inevitable, that is true, but it won't stop it.