All pigments possess characteristics and handling peculiarities that the pet portrait artist should be aware of to get the best from his or her paints. None more so than the range of whites and blacks, surely they all do the same job? No. The various whites and to a lesser extend blacks, all behave slightly differently and create different challenges for the artist. Described below are the popular types and the way they perform in paint.

Titanium White
This is not a pure white, but hints towards a cream cast. It does have excellent covering power and high tinting strength. It also can be regarded as permanent, it’s only weakness being it can chalk if exposed to weathering out of doors.

Zinc White
This is a stark white which is slightly transparent. It’s covering power is relatively poor and has average tinting strength. It is permanent.

Lead White (or. Flake white)
This comes somewhere between Titanium white and Zinc white. Good lead white had excellent covering power and tinting strength. As it ages it does have a tendency to yellow, this can be lessened by adding a small amount of zinc white. Lead white is toxic.

Pearl White
This is a modern pigment made from a blend of Zinc White and finely ground mica. The impression is a white with an iridescent sheen similar to the surface of a pearl. It is used mainly in acrylic and gouache paints.

Lamp Black
Most blacks are produced from carbon from differing sources, with each having a slightly different characteristics. Lamp black is an intense, absolute black, which appears to have a slight blue/brown cast that is only apparent in greys. Although, as it does have a very fine grain, if used lightly, it can become transparent. Although, due to it’s fine grain, if used thinly, can be transparent. If used heavily in lean media, it can have a sooty appearance. Lamp black can also be known as Carbon Black.

Ivory Black
Ivory black is the purest form of bone black, it’s said to be the most intense of the blacks.

Mars Black
It has superb permanence and is easier to prepare than the carbon blacks, making it a better option for artists who make their own pastels or tempera paints. It is extremely permanent and easier to prepare than the carbon blacks, so is favoured by artists that make their own pastels or tempera paints.

Until the close of the 18th century successful painters ran businesses in which methods of production, quality control and sales to customers were often very highly organised. In medieval times and during the Renaissance these were conducted in places that were literally workshops, usually rooms on the ground floor of a building that could be opened onto the street by means of shutter doors, thus acting as both a shop and a studio. Paintings were carried out in these workshops on a commercial level, tantamount to a modern trade or profession. oAlthough there was obviously allowance for originality, it remained within certain cnfines, with the emphasis on craftsmanship and mastery of the materials.

Workshops such as these were run by masters who, if attainted success, took on assistants and apprentices. Everything relevant to the production of paintings, from extracting pigments to laying a varnish, would form part of the workshops activities, and this body of accumulated knowledge would be passed on from master to pupil. As the painters’ studios developed, each new generation carried with them not only their own experience but also that gained from all their predecessors.

By the 16th century the more successful studios, like those of Titian and Raphael, must have been painting factories. They created great quantities of work, sometimes on a large scale, a major part of which would be done by assistants. Large studios continued into the next century with painters like Rubens’ and Van Dyck, but at some stage during the 17th century the system began to break down. There was a pronounced fall in technical excellence, as methods became sloppy.

By the 18th century painting was still considered a trade, but as painters lost the knowledge of technique in favour of creativity, the recognition of personal genius became something that all painters aspired to. Intellectualising artistic production in this way offered a socially acceptable path to greater status for the painters.

Until the close of the 18th century successful painters ran businesses in which methods of production, quality control and sales to customers were often very highly organised. In medieval times and during the Renaissance these were conducted in places that were literally workshops, usually rooms on the ground floor of a building that could be opened onto the street by means of shutter doors, thus acting as both a shop and a studio. Paintings were carried out in these workshops on a commercial level, tantamount to a modern trade or profession. oAlthough there was obviously allowance for originality, it remained within certain cnfines, with the emphasis on craftsmanship and mastery of the materials.

Workshops such as these were run by masters who, if attainted success, took on assistants and apprentices. Everything relevant to the production of paintings, from extracting pigments to laying a varnish, would form part of the workshops activities, and this body of accumulated knowledge would be passed on from master to pupil. As the painters’ studios developed, each new generation carried with them not only their own experience but also that gained from all their predecessors.

By the 16th century the more successful studios, like those of Titian and Raphael, must have been painting factories. They created great quantities of work, sometimes on a large scale, a major part of which would be done by assistants. Large studios continued into the next century with painters like Rubens’ and Van Dyck, but at some stage during the 17th century the system began to break down. There was a pronounced fall in technical excellence, as methods became sloppy.

By the 18th century painting was still considered a trade, but as painters lost the knowledge of technique in favour of creativity, the recognition of personal genius became something that all painters aspired to. Intellectualising artistic production in this way offered a socially acceptable path to greater status for the painters.