< COMMERCIAL PAINTS
HOW TO GET THE RIGHT FINISH
Most founders would perhaps agree, that accurately realising the artist’s envisaged PATINA and similar finishing instructions, is one of the most consistently challenging aspects of foundry work. Difficulties encountered in finishing a work can arise for any number of reasons, though most problems can be avoided through forward planning, good communication, plus an awareness of the demands and limitations of individual manufacturing and finishing processes.
Poor planning is often a major cause of problems, this can be especially evident toward the closing stages of a foundry project. Much time and energy is rightly spent on the production of a master pattern and cast, often against a backdrop of tight deadlines. Under such demanding circumstances, it becomes all too easy to put off making a clear decision about the finish until ‘later’. Unfortunately, being unsure of the finish towards the end of a project can result in decisions being made under pressure – with a successful outcome becoming something of a lottery. Many examples of an artist’s disappointment with their sculpture’s finished look can be traced back to earlier indecision or lack of forethought. The simplest solution is to thoroughly research the possibilities on offer and find creative ways around predictable problems as soon as possible. Consider the sculpture’s finish at length during the planning stages and view this aspect of the project as an integral part of the overall project, not as an optional add-on.
It is not always possible for the artist or designer to be fully familiar with all the foundry finishes on offer, so many founders retain patination and other surface finish samples for their client’s consideration (sometimes called PATINEURS SWATCHES). It is quite normal for the choice and execution of the finish to be a collaborative affair between the artist, who has a mental image of how the completed work should look, and the founder, who will advise on the practical and technical means of achieving this. By discussing the issue of finish early on, outline decisions can made in good time and the work prepared accordingly. Forward planning also allows adequate time if needed, for considered revision as work progresses through the founding process. Thinking the finish through is always preferable to panic changes just before an installation or delivery deadline.
As well as looking carefully at a founder’s selection of finish samples, viewing examples of cast artworks exhibited in various public and private collections can also be a helpful guide to the appropriate choice of a finish for a particular type or style of sculpture. Where practical, showing the founder a good quality colour photograph of a seen sculpture can give some indication of the desired finish effect for the work in progress. Bear in mind however, that an exact copy of a patination is notoriously difficult to achieve – even when the original’s chemical formula and application technique is known to the founder in some detail.
When selecting a paticular finish, bear in mind the scale, surface texture and form of the work – patination samples deposited on small test plates can have a dramatically different visual impact when applied to a large scale sculpture with complex textures and forms. Likewise, elaborate and unusual finishes that can be attractive on small scale sculptures, can appear gaudy or overbearing on a large scale work. Above all, keep in mind the fact that patination chemicals do not behave like paints and other predictable finishes. Providing the founder with a precisely painted colour swatch and then expecting this sample to be closely reproduced on a cast surface with a chemical compound, is not especially realistic (though in many instances the founder will be able to achieve something of a close approximation).
Price quotations from fine art foundries normally include an allowance for finishing (see INFORMATION). Costings are usually based on ‘standard’ foundry finishes and may therefore be open to review if a requested patination or other finish effect is especially difficult, time consuming or otherwise expensive for the founder to achieve. The founder’s fee does not normally include a treatment of the hollow interior of a cast, or the application of a corrosion protection to auxiliary structures such as support armatures and sub-frames (unless otherwise stated). The founder should be informed of any exceptional finishing requirements at an early point, doing this avoids later confusion and potential disputes over cost responsibilities.
Founders may also charge for the re-patination of any work which has been previously approved by the client, then later rejected for reasons other than faulty workmanship. A complete re-patination can be an expensive undertaking, usually all existing surface deposits must first be removed – including any protective (wax or lacquer) coating. There should be no need to re-patinate a work, provided careful consideration has been given to the choice of finish, the finishing work to be done by the founder is agreed upon in advance of application, and the results approved before installation.
Whilst problems do occasionally arise when finishing cast sculptures, it should be remembered that the vast majority of foundry works are completed with the minimum of fuss and to the artist’s complete satisfaction. Assistance and advice can be expected from a good founder, who should also provide information on their particular areas of finishing expertise and how this knowledge can be best applied to an individual artwork. Unless an artist is willing and able to experiment and take risks, or the nature of a work specifically demands an unusual treatment, non-standard finishes and patinations are best avoided. If a previously untried finish is being considered, then some level of appropriate testing should be carried out first. Testing can avoid the potential expense of having to replace an unsatisfactory finish.
FINISHING SUMMARY >
|
