One of the paintings I took to NOLA was an oil landscape. The style doesn't vary due to media, but a bit of the technique does... but safe to say that similar works in both media are about the same... until you look close and feel the paintings... the oils have a really lush feel to them (visually as well as physically) and it could become very addictive. Can't leave acrylics behind because I'd never be able to meet deadlines without their quick dry ability. But I do plan to begin more oils soon. I sure don't have a technique conqured yet, or anything close to one.
Funny thing... as I was showing Carol the oil she remarked that a customer had been very taken by my work but said he would never buy an acrylic painting, he only buys oils. Well... that's pretty stupid, I think, didn't know there were still any of that type still out there.
I'd asked this very question of Kay at Lagerquist in Atlanta and she said no one ever seemed to care... so there ya go. But the difference in the two galleries is that the Atlanta gallery probably deals more with decorators buying for someone else, and the NOLA gallery deals with individuals buying for themselves... at least that's my take, and it could account for the difference.
1 comment:
Hi Karen..........I've heard the same remark from a gallerist in Santa Fe. I think oils are beautiful, but like you think it's ridiculous to have to have oil over acrylic. It is the actual work that is important......not the medium.
Cheryl
Post a Comment