Distress Markers VS Paper

You may recall this little bit of posting I did earlier this year:
"I no longer like Distress Markers....I will just use up what I've got and not invest in any more."

Umm, yeah...about that...
I think I may have changed my mind.

At the beginning of the year, I was really hating my Distress Markers. They only seemed to work well on watercolor paper with water. I admit that I blamed the markers. In fact, it was User Error and high expectations. It was also my paper.

Let me back up a bit. (beep, beep, beep)
I was making a pocket letter for my niece and decided to color in a stamped image that I was going to fussy cut. So I grabbed a piece of scrap paper that I have in a small pile. I never really know what kind of paper/cardstock I'll grab. I grabbed something marvelous. This amazing scrap of paper allowed my Distress Markers to blend almost seamlessly with each other and with no added water or blender pen. No streaky lines or fast drying. The marker ink seemed to hesitate on the surface just before slowly sinking away. In fact, I smudged it. Honestly, I have only ever smudged a Distress Marker when I've used it on glossy cardstock.

I was amazed and truly excited. Eureka!!! What the heck kind of paper was this? I frantically dove into all my hoarded white cardstock. I pulled out everything I could think of and nothing matched it. OH NO! Was this little scrap of paper the last of some cut up card base? Was this all there was left and I can't figure out what it is? Finally, it came to me. Bristol. I had bought a pad of Bristol paper not long ago to try out with my new Zig markers. (The Zig markers that were going to replace these old Distress ones.) Yup, the papers matched...the amazing paper/cardstock was Bristol.

I had been watching a video by Kristina Werner when she mentioned her great success with Bristol paper and Zig markers. So I bought a pad of it to use with my Zigs. I don't know why I was so surprised that Distress markers worked so well, too. But I honestly think the Distress markers worked better on Bristol paper than my current watercolor paper!

So my next step was to swatch out my Distress and Zig markers on a variety of cardstocks that I have accumulated. I bought several varieties for different purposes and I'm now regretting it. I want only 2 white cardstocks, a watercolor cardstock, black and kraft cardstock, then a few colors for fun. I don't want to have 4 white cardstocks and not remember which one works with what supplies.

So if you're interested in my results, read on. If not (or if this is not news to you, I'm sure this is something that veteran colorists know already!), feel free to skip to the end.

I pulled out 6 different white cardstocks to test with both the Zig Clean Color Real Brush markers and the Distress markers. I wasn't very scientific about it. I wanted to see how colors blended together with just the markers and then with a blender pen. (I'm using a blender pen from Stampin Up.)
I'm using three colors of blues. From Zig: 036 Light Blue, 030 Blue, 038 Peacock blue. These colors aren't great for blending together, so I decided to use 2 sets of blues from the Distress line. One set blends pretty easily and the other...not so much. I used: Tumbled Glass, Broken China, and Mermaid Lagoon for the lighter blue set and Weathered Wood, Faded Jeans, and Chipped Sapphire for the darker set.

 I first tried Laser cardstock. This is from Hammermill and this 100 lb cardstock is designed for laser printing. I work in a copy shop and we use laser printers. This cardstock is scrap that we might otherwise throw out. I figured I'd use it for something. But from these tests, apparently I will be using it for card bases only. Both the Zig and Distress markers sank right into the paper and did not want to come back out to blend. It was practically instantaneous. This makes sense, naturally, as in a print shop you want that ink to dry as it comes right out of the copy machine so it doesn't smudge. But 100 lb scrap cardstock will be great as a base or to use as pages in a small journal. This stuff is super smooth and the Sharpie that I wrote with looked great. For coloring though, this was definitely the worst.

The next sample wasn't much better. It was Cheap Cardstock. I can't tell you a brand, in fact, I'm starting to think it might have been a large index card that I chopped up. Sometimes, I like to just use an index card to stamp something small that I'm going to cut out. It is definitely no heavier than 60 lb paper and it has a bit of tooth to it, not super smooth. The Zig markers liked this stuff better than the above though if overworked, the paper would start to pill. Blender pen pulled it along but still left the original mark. Distress markers showed no improvement over the laser paper.

Here is where the improvements began for both markers. This is white 65 lb cardstock from Recollections. I believe this is the Micheal's store brand of cardstock. It's a big thicker than an index card and much smoother. It's a joy to write and stamp on, too. I give this one a bit better rating because of it's smoothness. The smooth finish of this cardstock allows the ink to settle and spread slightly to provide very even coloring. Blending wasn't any better than the cheap stuff and it still pills very easily.

Next up is the watercolor paper/cardstock. I'm no expert on watercolor paper. I'm not a watercolor artist and I only use it for "washes" generally. But that may be because I hate stamping on it. Any way, these two markers performed better on this cardstock. Both Zig and Distress blended better on this watercolor paper. But I still couldn't get all the marker ink to "dissolve" so I still had dark blobs of color in the middle. My blender pen also pilled the paper pretty easily. This can't be a very good watercolor paper as I know Zig markers will work well on this type of substrate. I even tried just using water to lift the ink and move it around...the results were basically the same.

This one was a surprise to me. I didn't expect this cardstock to perform so well. This is 110 lb white Coredinations cardstock. I bought this to use as card bases. It was heavy and I didn't think it would work well for coloring...see my results with cheap cardstock. But this stuff gave me similar results to the watercolor paper. When I used the blender pen, I had much less pilling as well. This cardstock is also very smooth which is advantageous to a stamper.

The best performer of the bunch was Bristol. This is Strathmore Bristol that comes in the 9 X 12 pad with the yellow cover. It has a nice smooth surface. Both markers performed very well. The ink even stays wet on the surface for a bit before sinking in to the fibers. This allows you a small window to blend. My blender pen also worked very well without pilling the paper as I went over an area. Just be aware that the ink stays a bit wet on the surface so smudging is a possibility if you're not careful. Working in small areas a little at a time seems to be the way to go with this paper.


So overall, here's what I learned:
1. Bristol paper rocks for coloring. Both Zig and Distress markers work great on it.


2. Zig markers outperformed Distress markers on all papers when it came to blending the inks. Even on the crappiest of paper, some ink from a Zig can be pulled out of it's spot. Not so with Distress markers.


3. I have crappy watercolor paper. I'm fairly sure that my watercolor paper is not an artist quality paper. I found it very surprising that I couldn't get better results.


4. I'm astounded that Coredinations cardstock worked equally as well as watercolor paper. And for the Zig markers, it was a definite win.


So what am I going to do with this information?
I'm going to renig on my initial statement at the beginning of the year. I will probably not retire my Distress markers. In fact, I may get more. Even though the Zig markers blended better overall, on the Bristol paper, the differences were non-existant. They performed equally well. So if I invest in Bristol paper for coloring, I can use Distress markers in the way that I like. I LIKE the Distress line palette of colors. The Zig markers are bright and bold or dark and deep. But the Distress line is a line of muted colors...colors with a touch of brown or gray. They are more true to the things I color, like plants and animals, scenes and water. The recent additions of colors to the Distress line fill in gaps and allow for better blending.
Overall, I'm happy to report that I'm sticking with the Distress colors and adding in the Zig for simple coloring and whimsical images. I find myself thinking in Distress colors and that is why I'm so excited that I tried the Bristol paper. This paper has saved my Distress markers from the junk bin!



Thanks for sticking to the end of this long post.
Perhaps this information will save some of your markers, too!
-Wy
"I dream in color and paint what I see."

Creative Chemistry 103: Day 2

Putting up some fast blog posts for Creative Chemistry 103! I'm starting a Hell of a Week at work on Tuesday so won't have much more time to play with the class. So today and tomorrow were days to get a few techniques under my belt.

Here's what I "accomplished" out of Day 2's class:

Paint Resist:  I tried this technique mostly to play with my new Distress Paints. (I just bought 4 colors of Distress Paints when they were on sale at SimonSaysStamp. I have Abandoned Coral, Fossilized Amber, Lucky Clover, and Mermaid Lagoon. I highly recommend these colors for starting out! They mix and blend well together.) Overall as a technique, cool. I can see myself using this for more cards as the finished product is very flat, it gives layers with bulk.

Paint Lifting:  I enjoyed this technique as well except I didn't have Picket Fence Distress Paint. I used Gesso underneath the paint. I will be experimenting more with this technique with different colors of paint as the bottom layer as well as using Black. I want to use the above stencil to take a layer of black off of a multi-colored bottom layer. I guess I'll be buying Black Distress Paint next!

I didn't finish any projects but these will probably show up on some cards soon. Backgrounds like the one above tend to stump me as to how to use them. But I'll think of something...someday.

-Wy

Daler Rowney VS Izink VS Silks VS Fluid Acrylic

Soooooo...I finally dropped the hammer on getting some Daler Rowney FW Acrylic inks. I've wanted to try them out and play around with them to see if they are like some of the Izink I currently own. A sale on the inks HERE was enticing enough but then I saw that they come in NEON colors; Well, Damn! I'm all over that. I bought 4 bottles; colors that I hoped would round out a rainbow of colors with my Izinks.

But were they compatible? Were they even similar? I get so confused when products come into my field of vision and I'm not sure if they are the same as something I've got. (Just like the last showdown between Distress Crayons and gelatos!)

So entering the ring this time are acrylic inks! And then a couple more products entered the ring but fortunately none of them had folding chairs. (Sorry, wrestling reference...)

IN THIS CORNER:  Daler Rowney FW Acrylic Inks
These are a water-soluble acrylic ink that dries with a water resistant film on most surfaces. All 66 colors are very to extremely light-fast and can be mixed. They are permanent and translucent. They come in several varieties including shimmering and pearlescent. These inks can be used like a paint or used in pens and airbrushes. It can also be sprayed in a mister bottle and diluted with water. They come in a glass bottle with an eyedropper-like dispenser in the cap; it appears like the old black ink bottles of yesteryear.

AND IN THE OTHER CORNER: Izink from Aladine (Distributed by Clearsnap)
These are an acrylic based pigment ink that is acid-free and can be used on a variety of surfaces. According to the Clearsnap website, the ink is opaque and is mainly used for hobby arts and crafts. It is available in 26 colors, some of which are pearlescent. They can be diluted with water and used like a paint. They can be mixed. They come in a small bottle with an eyedropper-like dispenser in the cap.

So in a nutshell, I discovered that these two products are, for all intensive purposes, THE SAME.  They are both translucent and permanent which means you can easily layer colors on top of each other and still see the lower layer. Both come in the same delivery system; a bottle with an eyedropper.
Here's my test sheet:

I didn't have two colors that were similar so I just went with the green and yellow. (It made more sense to buy new colors in case they really were interchangeable.) I used a sturdy textured paper to test on. (It looks like watercolor paper but it doesn't really behave that way. It's paper that's designed for laser printing.) I tested two colors that both had shimmer to them.

While the Izink description said it was "opaque", it really wasn't. I painted right over black marker and it didn't even come close to covering it. This color is Cactus. I applied it with a brush with no water. It didn't take long to dry so I stamped over it with StazOn ink with no problems. Black markers worked over the top as well. I tried Sharpies and PITT pens. The brush PITT pen smeared just like it does over acrylic paint.

All of this was true for the Daler Rowney ink in the Hot Cool Yellow color. (Sorry the photo didn't come out too well!)

This sample also shows a little Fluorescent orange layered over the top.
The Daler Rowney ink seemed to be a bit more pigmented that the Izink but it's hardly a difference worth noting. I did learn that a little of both of these products goes a LONG way. I dropped the ink directly onto the paper before spreading it with a brush. I got a little too much yellow and man, I could have coated three times the area of my paper with it. Both had good shimmer to them but the Izink dried with more shimmer that the Daler Rowney...but that may also be because of said "too much" ink. As I was trying to spread out my mess of yellow ink, I ended up going over the same area several times. I think this may have covered up some of the shimmer. It just seems like the "thicker" parts of the ink aren't as shimmery. So for maximum shimmer, a thin layer is best.

A downside to both of these products is that the eyedropper can clog. Only one of my 5 Izinks has a clear eyedropper. And 2 of them came to me with clogged droppers. (In fact, I didn't realize they were really a dropper...I thought it was some kind of stirrer because I couldn't get any ink to draw up into it.) I bought 4 of the Daler Rowney inks and the yellow had a slightly clogged dropper. (The cause of my yellow mess when starting. At first, I thought the product was very thick but it was just a clump of mica/particles clogging up the dropper.) I haven't checked the Copper color I got. The neon colors aren't shimmery so no problems there.
Just a note that these things will occur with these products.

I also mixed colors and they mixed wonderfully together to create new colors. I got a seriously wonderful orange and a good purple color. I mixed them on my palette and brushed over paper.

So after testing, I added in two more products that I had at hand. These other two products had similar traits and I wondered how they would compare.
Joining in the fray:
TAG TEAM 1:  Silks Acrylic Glaze by ColourArte
These are iridescent paints that create a semi-gloss glaze and they contain mica. They work on a variety of surfaces and can be thinned with water. They come in 96 colors and all are shimmering. They are permanent and translucent. They come in a small pot.

TAG TEAM 2:  Golden Fluid Acrylic
Fluid acrylics are a type of acrylic paint that are generally more translucent that regular paint. Fluid acrylic is highly pigmented, light-fast, and permanent. They can be thinned with water or other mediums like airbrush medium. They can be mixed and work on a variety of surfaces. Golden produces 66 colors. They come in a small plastic bottle.

I tried out the Silks first since it was shimmery. I only have 4 of them but Pretty Peridot was a comparable green. Remarkably, but not surprisingly, the Silks had all the same characteristics of the other two. It behaved the same way with my tests.

But there is one glaring difference. Silks is thicker. It goes on more like a paint and has more body. As you can see in the above photo, those little background lines are where the paint held it's line. It seems that the Silks are the "heavy body" version of the other two.
The black pen test worked as well even though it is recommended that the Silks be allowed to cure for 48 hours.

So I had figured out that I had three products that did basically the same thing. One of them was just thicker than the others.

It seemed to me at this point that my Golden Fluid acrylics worked the same way without the shimmer. So since I had a comparable yellow, I made up a quick card for that.

The only difference I noted here was that this seemed more pigmented that all the others. I'm not sure if that's because the others has a shimmer and this didn't or if the nature of the product. If you look at the square on this card, you can see that the paint covers better here. Of course, this one is labeled "opaque" but then again, the Izink website says those are "opaque".

So what can I conclude?
I had fun playing with stuff and figuring out how they behave for the way I work. I now KNOW that these acrylic products are basically the same thing with small differences. Will I favor one more than the other? Probably.
I currently love the Golden fluid acrylics because they are an artist grade, high quality product and I'm still doing Inspiration Wednesday with Donna Downey...and that is the paint she uses most often.
But I'm very attracted to the Silks acrylic glaze simply because of the variety of colors and the shimmer they provide.
As for the Izink and Daler Rowney inks, I think they will find a place in my stash in certain colors. They are basically interchangeable so I'll go with whatever colors I like. (Like the neon colors from Daler Rowney or the Volubilis in Izink...a deep blue!)
 

I learned a lot from this play-time and it helped me to categorize my products. Now I understand what they can and can't do.

--Wy
"Success is not final. Failure is not fatal. It's the courage to continue that counts."  --Winston Churchill