Did you notice something with the Sleeping beauty turquoise? I bought a tube recently, so I'm concerned. Few years ago it faded to a pale brown olive on Jane Blundell's window. (See her blog)

@@__A_S__ this is my second test including SBturq and I haven’t seen issues. However DS has had problem batches of colors before. I have a sodalite that turns black, another artist mentioned Mayan blue also discolored away from light in her dry pan. Sadly it would not surprise me if some batches are just bad.

@@KimberlyCrick Thank you so much for your tests! So, this is like with White Nights, depending on a batch. You never know... Will get my fingers crossed, for mine isn't spoiled. Thank you.

I wonder if 1) Our harsh Aussie sun would make more difference, 2) if using a piece of museum glass or truview glass over tests by framing a small section, with air gap, or just placing glass over it may reduce these results. 3) using a few fixative tests may help increase light fastness? 4)Jane Blundell has done her own lightfastness tests, and only came up with a few colours that changed, from the mass tone. I talk to her regularly, and so can give this site to her. She will be interested to know this.

Why should they try to refute the results? DS and other manufacturers use different methods and test to different standards, so it would be like comparing apples to moon dust. This video is tested in accordance with ASTM D5398, “Standard Practice for Visual Evaluation of the Lightfastness of Art Materials by the User”. Manufacturers test to more rigid and controlled standards of ASTM D4303, “Standard Test Methods for Lightfastness of Colorants Used in Artists’ Materials”.

You can screen shot or just jot down the list provided... I'm betting there will be additions to the "fugitive pigments" page on her website as well as the Daniel Smith brand page, she's been updating it regularly.

She has a very detailed blog entry with amazing lists of all the problematic pigments with photos and information! You should check out Kimberly's site!

@@Shesvii Yes. I plan to do that 👍

he's been busing making color demonstration videos left and right. Doubt he'll ever stop to look.

I imagine tge REAL Dan Smith rues the day he sold his name to Cogley et al

...stop buying his paints if he doesn't fcukn listen. .. go schminke or mgraham , etc perhaps send him emails.

Definitely happy that it's a pretty small portion of the colors that have fading issues. If we could just get some proper labeling on a few of the most fugitive ones so we know what isn't ideal for sale, I think a lot of us would still love to use them in sketchbooks.

@@KimberlyCrick I heard via Steve Mitchell ,that NO H2O PAINTING SHOULD EVER BE PUT IN DIRECT SUNLIGHT...everything eventually will fade...especially more watered-down washes...especially any of the cobalts and reds...and of course opera with the uv thing.Cadmiums...I have heard, like the yellows, reds and oranges, fade much less...when exposed to sunlight

@@kookatsoonjan There are over a hundred pigments that can withstand repeat daily sunlight for many years. No watercolor should be stored in direct sunlight, unfortunately only *some* artists know this. Many people who buy art may hang it in their livingrooms across from a large sliding glass door for display. Each day around sunset or sunrise beams of light shine through onto the art, which is why it's important for those who sell work to understand which pigments are the most durable. It would be best to skip the ones we know can fade in just months, versus many years.

Yes, there's no reason for a color made of PW20, PW6 and an iron oxide to fade the way these do. There has to be a fugitive undisclosed red pigment in those duo cactus/pinkish pearl colors and a fugitive blue in sapphire they aren't telling us about. Sad about the length of this list too! It'll be worse at one year :(

Thanks Alyona, I appreciate that and I'm glad it was useful!

It is very frustrating... sometimes professional astm/bws tests are done using a pigment in another binder - such as acrylic or oil paint. Many times that same rating is put on watercolor paint labels, even though diluting with water isn’t the same as tints in white for acrylic. Then there’s brand differences, if everyone says PR177 is LFI because QOR had a good sample, other brands may assume their PR177 is fine too even if it was made in another country. It’s crazy the type of information that gets passed down to us as consumers!

@@KimberlyCrick sorry, I just saw your reply. Thanks for explaining the procedure to me. It is just confusing. Makes me wonder if it is really worth buying the expensive brands when we cannot trust the information on the label.

Hehe I always laugh when I have those thoughts about Prussian too. Yes, I too was a bit disappointed about PV32. Bordeaux fades less than some, but it is a mixable color that you could try to achieve using more stable paints. Happy painting :)

It's true, there's well over a hundred single pigment paints and countless mixtures that will stay completely lightfast even in years of sunlight. I am really glad we have so many to play with. Now if only we could get the ones that aren't so lightfast to be properly labeled! Happy painting :)

I'll definitely work on that! I'm currently doing full range testing for Schmincke and Sennelier for upcoming videos, as well as a couple color spotlights for a specific pigment that many brands have lightfast issues with.

I'm not a big fan of MGraham unfortunately I've had too many problems with them. I have enjoyed Mission Gold in the past, but Sennelier honey colors are my favorite of the honey based watercolors because they can hold gradients really well (colors stay where you put them in wet washes, keeping your blending work in place). In case you want to see my in-progress summary about my MGraham experience, you can find it at - www.kimcrick.com/pages/m-graham-watercolor-paint-review-color-chart-swatch-cards-lightfast-tests

I know, I too was sad by Bordeaux and am hoping the fading doesn't get much worse between 6 to 12 months. I'd hate to see that one fade more. I couldn't believe how long the list of iridescent problem colors was...

So I choose quin violet instead, similar hue with superior lightfastness.

That is really good to know!!! I believe you, i had the same problem with sodalite genuine actually. It turned black from blue after a couple years in a dry pan!

@@KimberlyCrick oh noooooo! I like the subtle blue of Sodalite! it's so expensive. Why can't DS's "enhanced" chemical help maintain the color ? XD

@@KimberlyCrick I need to check my Sodalite now.

@@dannychen1064 it's disappointing. Regarding the recent DS controversy and how I complained about their mislabeling, someone told me I was whining and didn't have any right to complain because the paints are beautiful anyway. If this DS issue had happened with a fancy jewellery company that sells real "gold" items that are just copper with a fine gold layer while charging the price of gold, they'd complain, too!

@@Shesvii haha you're so right. In fact we should complain more when the CEO of that jewelry company issued a claim that 'that is how things are done."

Yes, I tried Krylon's UV clear spray and archival sprays, both of which caused the colors to change weirdly over time. Sometimes the fading was slightly less, but instead made a pink lean orange as it faded. I know that some artists have had success with thick layers of resin instead of thin sprays (thick distorts UV better) but you're really just better off using stable trustworthy pigments from the start. Most UV protective glass is useless too, unless it's the very expensive kind used in museums that would be cost prohibitive to most artists sadly.

@@KimberlyCrick thank you for the video & this additional comment! Been researching UV sprays as a possible solution and you just save me a ton of time.

@@KimberlyCrick Whatcha think about the "cold wax" treatment, and then a krylon varnish...like the one you use for pastels?

@@kookatsoonjan In general it's always a gamble if you'll ruin your painting by applying surface treatments and sealers. Cold wax application is a delicate time consuming process that results in slightly changed colors and a minor sheen in areas with even paper-thin layers of over-application. Since Krylon varnish can not only discolor watercolor, but also yellow over time (the "archival" varnish supposedly is more safe) I don't see how this type of thing would be preferable over just using the most lightfast paints. If you're trying to save a painting you've already done though, Golden acrylic makes some UV protectant varnishes that may be more effective than Krylon (the application of which still has the risk of changing the appearance of your watercolors though).

@@KimberlyCrick Thanks for your honest opinion...so many different ones out there...I guess all the pastel artists out there, that use Krylon fixative will also have colour changes...I think that is why they say that oil and acrylic paintings hold their value more so than pastel or H2O...Possibly also why there are so so many glicee prints everywhere, and way less originals...but I guess no sun is a good rule of thumb. So many reds, purples and pinks are not lightfast...like a primary colour...but I guess there are at least one of the warm and cool reds, that are more lightfast than others.

Will do! Until then, I recently posted images of W&Newton's full range lightfast test results at www.kimcrick.com/pages/winsor-and-newton-professional-watercolor-review-109-color-chart-swatch-cards-lightfast-test

DaVinci doesn't make too many fugitive colors (avoid opera which has dye in it and artemis that has PR177 along with 2 mixtures with weak ingredients like PY40 and PR88 and the PH/heat sensitive Cobalt Violet PV14 which is rated LFI in all brands despite its tendency to fade). DaVinci does not make paints that are more or less fugitive than other brands of the same ingredient. Every company can choose to publish ratings based on 3 common options: 1) the published ASTM record at the time (a publication listing pigment numbers and their assigned LF rating - where a different brands pigment was tested), 2)the published blue wool scale rating from the pigment manufacturer (converted into LF scale and may or may not include tints/diluted tests that reduce the rating appropriately), 3) rarely a paint company will test their own paints and not follow the common previous examples (such as golden/qor does their own amazingly in-depth testing including machine and natural light and really diluted tints, then self-rates their labels). These choices are also why brands sometimes offer conflicting information. Such as Sennelier which has a rating of LFIII but also 3/3 max stars for PR122 Magenta on their chart, because they offer the ASTM old published rating (despite being outdated from a bad brand in the 1990s) along with a more accurate self rating. Sadly that results in a confusing "fugitive and lightfast" rating at the same time despite PR122 being lightfast. I usually spend more time concerned about flagging problem pigment code numbers rather than listening to the brand rating. Yes, LFI and LFII are both considered lightfast for fine art since it would take about 50-100 years of indoor light for these to become problematic. Some LFI colors are actually BW9 (we just don't commonly test that high) so some LFI/BW8 rated colors will fade in a year or two of direct sun while others may last a lifetime (iron oxides could be BW9/converted to LF0 if we had such a rating). A pigment number known to fade in one brand will VERY likely be the same amount of fading in another brand - regardless of rating. There are some rare exceptions to this (PR177 and PV23 can have a slight chemical variation with superior UV durability). For those particular pigments I've found only Qor uses the more durable PR177 and only cheap student paints use the cheap fugitive PV23. I'm slowly working on making a list on my website for the pigment code numbers to avoid. The brand review pages on my site will likely continue to receive more image updates regarding LF rather than video updates over the next year. Testing is in progress for several thousand colors across 50+ paint brands. Happy painting :)

I am really hopeful about PV49 as a PV14 alternative, since Cobalt Violet has been so strange. I'm testing multiple types and will definitely make a video about it in the future. I have never seen any issues at all with PG50 including all of the green and teal variants - they seem stable. Thankfully, they are some of my favorites! I think Daniel Smith's PG19 might be acting a bit like Roman Szmal's malachite, having some acidic chemical reaction with the binder causing yellowing. Luckily that seems to be a rare thing.

Ooh that's very exciting news! I've separated my PV14 from my lightfast/archival pigments and was also hopeful for PV49! It's an absolutely gorgeous color! And different than Sennelier's Cobalt Violet Deep Hue (which is also super lovely but not as pink) I'm thrilled to learn my green PG50 is good to use!

It's a tricky one for sure. I'm slowly working my way through some other Primatek dupes, but if I crack the code on Sodalite I'll be sure to make a video. I haven't gotten all my colors out to play with mixtures for it yet, but if I had to guess Schmincke's French Ultramarine (the most granulating PB29) and Lunar Black (or someones highly granulating PBk11) may be a good start. I'm pretty bummed out about DS and the Jackson's post... it was really sad to see them blow off artist findings of what are plainly LFIII-IV marginal to fugitive colors that are all sold as LFI.

I use Arches (140# cotton cold press) for all of my swatch cards and lightfast test strips.

Its not ok, its just still within an acceptable LFII fading or hue shift at this stage. I expect all colors using PY83 will become notably worse by 1 year. There’s a couple other colors like quin red pv19 that are becoming borderline LFIII level problems too. This 6 mo update list is focusing on the very most fragile colors, sadly by 1 year there may be another 5-10 colors that become prominent issues :(

@@KimberlyCrick Aaah, I see! Thank you for going such thorough testing on them! I really can't thank you enough!

You know, it totally slipped my mind the other day, but I really should mention that this stage of the test is the least brutal sun wise as it spanned winter months. As it gets more intense summer sun the fading will increase, so if you did your test in stronger UV rays it would be faster!

@@KimberlyCrick Ah, okay! Great to know, I didn't realise that! 😊 Yeah, I'm in Sweden. I'd guess our UV index is around 6-7 in the summer (when my test was made), so not as high compared to other countries, but we have sun for a longer time per day. It should definitely exceed the UV stenght during the winter months, at least in many places. :)

@@KimberlyCrick what would be a lightfast alternative to PY83.

I have a written list of just the colors that fade in this post - www.patreon.com/posts/new-daniel-smith-76343593

@@KimberlyCrick thwnk you Kim- that's a huge help

I haven't seen any fading in hansa yellow PY97 yet, though this may change in months 6-12. This amount of time means that it's likely LFII or better though. It would take many months for it to fade unlike so many of the fragile colors that faded in the first few months of testing.

It's not your fault that the paint company is irresponsible with their labeling. Hopefully the person you gifted art to is aware not to hang the piece where it gets a lot of natural light.

Unfortunately all Cobalt Violets have some PH sensitivity, so depending on the humidity, heat and alkaline nature of your paper/painting water there will always be some change eventually. I have noticed more change in PV14 than the other versions like PV49, but similarly to how ultramarines are acid sensitive, cobalt violet is chemically alkaline sensitive. I'll be doing some chemistry experiments to see if I can figure out how to best prevent these changes. It's sad because it can easily happen on accident. Most companies won't even make acrylic paints with PV14 because of how fast it changes color in alkaline binders. I'll be sure to post a video about all the options after I've done more lightfast testing and experiments with alternatives.

@@KimberlyCrick Thank you :)

I made a note to look into duping them in the future. At some point I'll see what colors with better lightfastness may be able to closely mimic mayan red and blue. Luckily if you're not hanging art near a window I doubt you'll ever see problems with your paintings.

Not usually. I've never seen two lightfast pigments become fugitive when mixed with other pigments. There are sometimes chemical interactions between colors or ingredients though. Like Malachite and honey based binder will start to turn yellow-brown when mixed together while typically stable individually. There may be rare interactions between certain chemicals like cadmiums or nickel azo with sulphides or mercury in some rare toxic pigments like Cinnabar / Vermilion PR106. These type of interactions are pretty rare in most common modern pigment mixtures.

I’ve been painting for about 10 years, there’s paint e v e r y w h e r e lol. White nights old lf report is in my 36 se/yarka st petesberg video. A new test has only recently started since white nights just got rid of a ton of fugitive colors in 2020, removing a lot of problem pigments from their catalog. I will be doing a spotlight on PO64 fading next, white nights orange and peach though - it’s really bad!

@@KimberlyCrick Great, that's a brand I am considering upgrading to. I am now using their Sonnet student grade set. That is pretty good, but has quite some fugitive paints in it (which is not a big deal, considering the price and overall quality of that set).

All companies lie. It is called advertising and marketing. I do not understand the rage-level of hate D.S. invokes in some people, and hope they find alternatives and the knowledge that if you dont like it, no one cares. And that's ok.

@@bethbloomer5951 rage? Hate? Not even a little bit. If you don't care, you're welcome to keep that to yourself.

lol that response

I've been wanting mayan dark blue since its so pretty. I think i still will buy it for sketchbook or just for me paintings. But it is rather annoying. Im trying to build a good collection of lightfast colors I can use for my portfolio peices as I'm hoping to apply for a local artist residency next year that my art teacher recommended me for but so many supposed lightfast colors are not. And then theres online classes and this watercolor workbook i got for more practice and techniques and they all have supply lists with fugitive colors 🙄 like fine its practice art but maybe we could practice with colors that wont fade? I tried asking one online teacher why he uses opera and alizarin since I know he sells his original peices and got no response 😬

@@prophetkat if you're having an education in art though, you'll know that you can mix any colour you like (neons excluded obviously) from a basic palette. There are plenty of lightfast options in the primaries. It's nice to have all the different rare pigments as a convenience but they all can be replicated by mixing. It's possible that his clients are made aware that they shouldn't display his work in direct sunlight and he didn't feel like he had to justify himself as a professional artist to a student, or I suppose he could have just missed the question too. You can always switch out colours that aren't lightfast for something in your palette that is, though. I don't think a workbook will criticise you for switching out a colour for something similar.

Rhodonite both browns/dulls/hue shifts from its interaction with air and other chemicals, but also fades in the presence of UV light. Absolutely PV19 is a superior alternative to Rhodonite.

@@KimberlyCrick can you test Rembrandts watercolour lightfastness as well. Rembrandts sells PV32 as well, just wondering if it fades just like Daniel Smiths version

There was no change at in Buff Titanium at 6 months. There may be a minor hue shift by 1 year, but overall it's very stable. Ds now offers specifically buff (brown leaning) or gray (cement color) versions that may perform differently batch to batch due to natural variations.

@@KimberlyCrick Thank you, so much for your prompt reply, so very much appreciated, I couldn't find the information anywhere else. x