Watercolour paper test (Arches, Cezanne, Montval, Fabriano)
+++
31.05.2020:
Saunders Waterford, hot pressed, 300g/m2, high white
St Cuthberts Mill, 100% Cotton watercolour paper.
Fun to sketch in pencil - 5/5
Fun to paint on: - 2/5 (Very similar to the previous hot pressed paper it just doesn't work for me. The texture was pleasant to the touch though.)
Keeping the paint within the lines: - 1/5 (Only if I was using very little water did it stay in the lines.)
Fun to lineart: - 4/5 (The only drawback is that it dried for a longer time, so I had to wait, or the lines got blurry.)
Scanning results: - 5/5
The texture looks nice and if I was painting with layers instead of all at once - it could work. But hot pressed papers are generally not my thing.
+++
24.05.2020:
Daler Rowney Aguafine smooth hot pressed 300g/m2.
Fun to sketch in pencil - 5/5
Fun to paint on: - 2/5 (First I was going to give it a 1, since painting with my normal technique was not possible on this paper. But later I realised it's quite similar to my old S&D sketcbook, and decided it's decent enough to get a 3. It turned out it's possible to mix colours by making layers on it instead of mixing them immediately before the paint dries. But this paper is generally very tiring to use, because you have to always take care to make your edges look good. So I wouldn't recommend this to the beginners. In the end, since this should be a proper watercolour paper, and not the one from a sketchbook, I decided to go with the mark between the two. It's not as bad as a poster board. but it's not really a good watercolour paper. Besides the S&D it also reminds me a little of Canson Imagine Mix Media - but I feel Canson has a slightly better texture.)
Keeping the paint within the lines: - 5/5
Fun to lineart: - 5/5
Scanning results: - 4/5
+++
10.05.2020:
Fabriano Artistico Creme:
Fun to sketch in pencil - 4/5
Fun to paint on: - 3/5
Keeping the paint within the lines: - 4/5
Fun to lineart: - 2/5 (It's just slightly less painful than Arches, even though the texture seems smoother.)
Scanning results: - 3/5
I didn't like the texture of this paper and it didn't blend the colours enough. The drying time was super fast too, so I couldn't make corrections over time - and if I could, they were very limited. The colours look kind of nice on it, I think? Linearting was pretty painful though. Not as much as Arches, but painful nonetheless.
I think some people might like it, if they're okay with this type of texture. It's probably closer to the high quality papers like Arches from what I could tell. And I can't tell much, since it's just not my thing.
+++
27.04.2020:
Today I've tested Canson Montval Torchon Snowy surface and Canson Montval Aquarelle Cold pressed.
Review: It's horrible, don't buy it. (Unless they make more of it.)
Real review: Aquarelle Cold pressed has slightly more profound texture.
and
My evaluation:
Fun to sketch in pencil:
Torchon - 5/5
Cold pressed - 5/5
Fun to paint on: (Taking in the water/paint + blending while the paint should still be slightly wet.)
Torchon - 5/5
Cold pressed - 5/5
Keeping the paint within the lines:
Torchon - 5/5
Cold pressed - 5/5
Fun to lineart:
Torchon - 5/5
Cold pressed - 5/5
Scanning results:Torchon - 5/5
Cold pressed - 4/5
(I was literally crying tears of happiness when painting on the snowy surface, so I can't call this a normal test anymore - it's too subjective. Sorry. TvT )
+++
25.04.2020 Update: Canson Montval Torchon has arrived, so tomorrow I will be streaming more watercolour paper testing! : D
26.04.2020 Update: Sorry, after all no stream today. I will try to stream tomorrow instead. o/
+++
25.04.2020:
Arches vs Cezanne
Hi, guys~!
Recently I had the pleasure of testing the legendary Arches watercolour paper, as well as Hahnemühle's Cézanne watercolour paper.
Both are very high quality papers (also expensive), cold pressed, and made 100% out of cotton. These types of papers tend to take water in well and are best suited for the wet on wet technique. I heard many artists say that Arches was their favourite watercolour paper, so I really wanted to test it out for myself once.
Disclaimer: That being said, what I was testing them for was not wet on wet; but how well I can draw a manga painting on them, mostly with the dry on dry technique (with a mix of others), focusing on the details, and adding a ball-pen lineart.
Here is a little glimpse of how I usually paint:
If I was to describe it - I use watercolours like alcohol markers (which I couldn't afford at the time xD). After putting one colour on another I hope to be able to blend it a little with the one below by stroking that place with the slightly wet brush. I want my watercolour paper to be able to store enough water that it doesn't wrinkle, because I want to add depth to the colours with a few layers, that I blend. And I want my paint to not go out of the line (I try to take care of that while it dries). Finally, I want it to scan nicely to have no visible texture that disturbs the details of the painting.
versus
To put it bluntly - I'm sure these are very nice papers, but I'm never using them again. xD They're both very badly suited for my style and I don't like either of them.
Arches has the advantage of better taking in water. I like how I can blend the colours with it. But it's still not as much as what I can do with some other papers. Nothing extremely amazing here. But it is good. Cezanne on the other hand acts like some cheap paper and it was a real pain to even get the paint to blend into another layer nicely. But what I liked about it is that it had this nice blend into the paper itself. So if I wasn't using a lineart - it might have been nice for some wet on wet techniques.
The grain on both papers is extremely big and it is visible on the scan, which I don't like. Arches especially has a very rough surface. Drawing the lineart was especially painful - it felt as if I had to carve it in stone. The ups and downs of the paper made the pen uneven and turned the proces of linearting into a torture. Cezanne's surface is much smoother and was actually okay to lineart on. The texture doesn't show too much on the scan either. But what's the point, if I can't even add another layer of paint, since it dries immediately and doesn't let me make a correction even after 2-5 seconds. That's too fast even for a cold press.
Another aspect is that I had really big difficulties in keeping the paint within the lines for Arches. While drying it was spilling outside. It took a lot of effort to make it look normal. I rarely see cold pressed papers do that, so I was surprised. Cezanne didn't have such problems more than what usually happens to watercolour papers.
My evaluation:
Fun to sketch in pencil:
Arches - 2/5 - I felt like I couldn't even use eraser afterwards + super bumpy surface made it hard to draw on
Cezanne - 5/5 - no problems
Fun to paint on: (Taking in the water/paint + blending while the paint should still be slightly wet.)
Arches - 4/5
Cezanne - 2/5
Keeping the paint within the lines:
Arches - 2/5
Cezanne - 4/5
Fun to lineart:
Arches - 1/5
Cezanne - 3/5
Scanning results:Arches - 2/5
Cezanne - 4/5
This is actually way below the avarage for me. My favourite paper gets fives in all categories.
It was an interesting experiment, but I'm never touching these papers again. xD' I'm so sorry to everyone who loves them. I'm sure they have their own advantages. But for my painting style they're just a below-the-average watercolour papers, which I have a dozen of and never use. My opinion might have been influenced by how high my expectations were, and how high the price of those papers was. I have a friend who is a big fan of Arches, so I might just give her the rest of those papers, since she would probably be much happier with them than me. xD' Thank you for reading, and I hope it was interesting? Take care!
PS. Now I'm kind of wondering if I should have checked the hot pressed Arches...? But I usually like cold pressed (although those with the smoother surface) papers more.