i guess it is kind of randomly asking but do anyone know a good site to stream newly released movies online ?

@Uriah Jeremiah I would suggest FlixZone. Just google for it :)

@Wade Braden yea, been watching on flixzone for months myself =)

@Wade Braden Thanks, I signed up and it seems like a nice service :) I really appreciate it !!

@Uriah Jeremiah Happy to help =)

thank you!

+Sharon Cullen Fine Art can't wait. So much enjoy your channel. A fellow Michigander. Lol

The charts that are plastic coats or whatever guide a more accurate color balance than a printer. Oh, and I don't remember saying that Daniel Smith used SD in their paints. Such an old video. I'd have to go back and watch it to accurately comment back

Al MacIntosh Thank you. That was a practice painting I believe. I painted my girlfriend’s cat for her to give to her husband for Christmas. It was his cat actually. I do have a video on it. Here is a link to it. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bLilhMyCydSWYas.html

Hi Sharon, I'm sorry I seem to have come across to you like that. I'll just have to stop being lazy and type more. Maybe I can communicate better then. But yes, I was trying to be nice. Here's a description of this from my perspective: I was on ebay, trying to decide if I'm going to buy some Mijello set, and if so which one. So I hunted around for more information. Which brings me to your video. You read ASTM 4238, which immediately confused me because I've never heard that number before (actually, I only know 4236, 5067 and 4303, but those three seem to be the only ones relevant to watercolors). So I go to ASTM and their Art material category. No trace of any 4238. I do a search at the ASTM site and up pops that electrostatic textiles. At this point it seems a pretty sure guess that it is supposed to be 4236, which you often find on watercolors. In the video, you also say that you're confused and that you don't understand why there are no ASTM ratings. So of course I figure: "Sharon will be interested to know this!". So I start to type my post. The quote and "?" at the beginning is to establish the context and my reaction. I do see that it's conceivable to read a tone into that, but I assure you that that tone was nowhere near my mind. I was just being careless. The rest is just meant to be information. It seems only natural to explain the nature of all three ASTM numbers that you're likely to encounter. Why wouldn't you be interested in that? - Of course you would! And I've read (or tried to read) the fineprint on watercolors often enough myself, so that's why I went into detail about the nature of the writing. It's not sarcasm, it's an admission that it's hard to read. The capital letters on the standard, finally, was just me copying and pasting. It came out that way. I was too lazy to retype it, I didn't mean to "shout". I hope that this clears up anything between us, but I'll add a few things while I'm going. It's part of my personality to be brief and factual. I'm like that. I'll try thinking about how I phrase things in the future. The other thing is that I remember you complained about somebody attacking you. I have no clue about that. I haven't seen the videos (yet), and I haven't seen the exchange. But it's conceivable that you may suspect I have some affiliation with some of those? Well, I can only assure you that I don't. Vermiliontea is my one and only identity on KZfaq. The only one I've ever had, and I've had it since ages. Take care.

Hi Sharon, concerning "non-toxic" and children: I haven't read D4236 (it's an expensive document) but as it concerns specifically labeling of Art materials, I suspect it's rather lax. Artists are supposed to have special requirements (permanence) and are supposed to handle their stuff only as intended. Generally, I have never trusted "Non Toxic" since I was a kid. I remember that label popped up on paint tins as soon as they removed things like White Lead, Red Lead, Arsenic, Mercury and Chrome, despite the obvious fact that the paints still contained nasty solvents etc. I suspect Mijello was free to put on that label because they don't have any Cobalts or Cadmiums. There is not enough time and money around to thoroughly research health effects of all modern pigments., but it is well known that both Quinacridone and Naphthol pigments are harmful to ingest. Personally, I'm cautious of ingesting any synthetic watercolor pigments. And I don't overdo painting on my skin either. For two reasons: They're very permanent and insoluble in water; they don't break down and flush out. Secondly, their small particle size. They're small enough to freely pass through most natural body filtering systems (look at how they stain your palettes). It's probably more harmless to eat a tube of oil paint than watercolors. Same concern about airbrushing. I wouldn't airbrush artist watercolors. I haven't solved the problem of finding safe watercolors for children. I'm thinking that artist watercolors, serious student ranges too, are never safe for children. And that one should go around looking for specifically children's watercolors. Preferably made from food colorants.

No reason to be alarmed. Quinacridones are typically not declared as toxic and in the 'Color of Art database' www.artiscreation.com/Color_index_names.html (You'll like that resource) It's classed as A, meaning "nontoxic". I can't say now where I picked up that it's not good to eat, but I did somewhere. Watercolors is a pretty benign media. We have no solvents and we have no dust. My conviction is that there is no need for gloves and that occasional splashes of paint on the hands is completely harmless. Even if it would be a paint that is classed as toxic, as Prussian Blue or Cobalt Blue. But you know, children, where there's children there often comes smaller children. Curious children. And they can get anything into their head. Face painting, painting 'tattoos', makeup, and doesn't that pan color look just like candy?

P.S. that pigment database I gave you a link to, also has other useful links. One of them goes to a consumer safety document. It says - about material for children - exactly what we reasoned and concluded: "Read the labels and only purchase art and craft materials intended for children". It also confirms our scepticism: "Note that even products labeled ‘non-toxic’ when used in an unintended manner can have harmful effects."

I hope they don't draw bears! Hehe! The honey and the sorbitol sound like they are probably the ones making it sticky. I'm eager to see your paintings using these paints and to hear back after your trip, if they travelled well or made a mess (let's hope for the first one!).

There is no proof that any of the brands do this and no way Mission Gold Company would have this information. I doubt they sent out spies to find out the secret formula of other brands. This is just claims that could be bogus by Mission Gold that is a competitor to the others. Holbein has made bogus claims about their competitors in the paint business that have proven to be incorrect so this company might not be any different.

I have used their gouache but not the watercolors. I have a watercolor video coming out later today. As you get to know watercolor better just shop around buying a couple paint tubes or pans in each brand you are interested in. I like Daniel Smith for their amazing textural effects in the granulating paints as well as the level of luminance in the transparents. It is something you likely wouldn’t notice as a beginner but over time you will become more aware of.

This threw me a bit. I am thinking you meant paints? They are still more tacky than anything else I own. But to be honest I haven’t used them in a couple years.

Well it depends. You don’t need it. I use it often in skies and shadows, although in a video I posted today I never used it.. You are asking the wrong person! Have you seen my palette? I have a plethora of paint and never stop buying things to try. Sometimes I use them up and never buy again but moonglow is one I have bought a couple times now.

Thank you so much for the long paragraph and in-depth reply. You covered so much information in the response! I want to buy the near perfect set for studio practices, as well as for the producing portfolio pieces. I have tried a few brands and different palettes but they're student quality and or have limited colour variety. Which is why I want to invest in a good artist quality set with a good colour range. I do have easy access to Daniel Smith and I do know its one of the best brands for watercolour, but it's just too costly for me. I am currently leaning more towards the Holbein HWC 48 set and the Mijello Pure Pigments (24 colours) set. For Shinhan, I own quite a few of their products. All of my gouache paint are by them, and I have a large collection of their touch markers. The quality is excellent for those two, but I just haven't tried their watercolour yet so I don't know much about the quality. I think I may end up getting the Holbein HWC 48 colours set in the 5mL tube, but I may change my mind.

​@@enchanfinty Hi! I know this is a very old comment but I hope you see this. I'm currently stuck choosing which brand to go for (holbein, mijello or shinhan) and I've been checking both youtube and instagram but I'm hesistant about which to purchase. I've been painting with watercolors for almost 5 years now and have only used a couple student grade brands and have been meaning to upgrade. Daniel Smith is waaay out of my budget so I've stuck with these three bands that I can afford. Your reply will be greatly appreciated!

@@neonyuu224 hi, so ive only personally tried Holbein, Sakura, Winsor and Newton Cotman, Kuratake Gambi, and Marie. I use the Shinhan gouache for other types of paintings or more opaque parts. Out of all those, I like Cotman for being the cheapest that also have pretty good quality pigment and blending. I also really like Holbein for how bright and smooth the colours dry out to be. I dont think you can go wrong with Mijello, Shinhan or Holbein, but I picked Holbein for the overall better lightfast. (You can see how holbein performs if you check out my super old illustratiins on instagram, and i have in my youtube videos showing simple illustrations with Winsor Newton Cotman)

@@enchanfinty thanks a lot for the reply! Checked your IG and vids. I'll prolly buy mijello and some holbeins too :)

I wasn't implying the granulation claims were your but inferred this from other videos that I'd watched. It was just my experience. The ultramarine that I used was very granular, to a point where it was separating from the other pigments on the paper. To be honest I'm not keen on paint brands from the far east. I still think European and US brands are better. Maybe I'm just a sucker for buying new products to try?? ;-)

I buy Jackson's Art's own brand here in the UK. A lot of quality paint for your money. I agree. The Mission Gold are more intense than Cotman paints but can be tricky to work with. I have a few Holbein paints and a big box of Shinhan paints. Of the 3 brands the Shinhans are the most forgiving. Unfortunately some of the hues are way off the described colours. My favourite student brand is Talens Van Gogh. Most of them are lightfast and they perform well on good paper.

seem the prussian blue is fugitive as well... thus influencing the mixed ones as well...