Art Supply Comparison: Water-Soluble Crayons and Pastels

Time for another art supply comparison post, this time on water-soluble pastels and crayons! As with my coloured pencil comparison, I’m only testing products that are marketed as ‘Artist Grade’. The crayons/pastels I’ll be testing in this post are:

  • Caran D’Ache Neocolor 2
  • Derwent Artbar
  • Cretacolor AquaStic

The Neocolor 2s and the Artbars are both wax-based crayons, whereas the AquaStics are oil-based pastels. Because of these differences, you could almost argue that they don’t belong in the same comparison/review, but I personally think they are similar enough that comparing them could be helpful for those who aren’t sure what they should buy, especially since (from what I’ve observed in online artist forums) they seem to be the three most popular water-soluble crayons/pastels used by artists.

For my tests, I chose three primary colours, three tertiary colours and black and white, all of varying lightfastness ratings (see end of post for more info). As I did with the coloured pencils, I’ve created gradated swatches with the colours, as well as using them for common pastel/crayon techniques, such as blended gradients, layering, mixing, crosshatching, rubbing and sgraffito, adding water to each technique to test the products’ water solubility. I also tested the colour concentration by drawing a consistently-sized dot of colour and washing it out into a large square. The paper I have used is Eraldo di Paolo 225gsm Field Pad paper.

Here is my original test chart (click image for a larger version):

Softness/Hardness/Blending/Layering/Water-Solubility

The Neocolor 2s are the hardest, followed closely by the Artbar; the AquaStics are quite soft in contrast, no doubt due to their oil-based nature. In spite of this, I actually found that the Neocolor 2s blended the easiest and most smoothly when laid one on top of the other, but finger/heat blending was slightly easier with the AquaStics, creating some nice transition effects. The Neocolor 2s, being harder, kept a point better, meaning they are probably the best for smaller details. Even when applying light pressure, I found that the AquaStics wore down quite quickly since they were so soft.

One thing about the Artbars that I do like above the other brands is their triangular barrel shape. Not only does this stop them rolling off the table (I’m forever running over pastels with my chair wheels because they’ve fallen off my desk), but it also gives you the opportunity to make a wider range of marks, from triangle stamping to long thin lines to wider strokes of colour. To me, it seemed that you needed to use more pressure to lay colour down, so they do wear down a bit faster. Also, they smell nice (I’m not weird, they just have a nice, arty smell… Don’t judge me!). That being said, I found them the most difficult to work with in terms of layering and blending. When layering one on top of another, the top colour sometimes lifted off patches of the under layer, resulting in sometimes blotchy coverage; a similar thing happened when blending two layered colours by heating and rubbing.

All three products responded well to being washed, though Neocolor 2 dissolved a little more cleanly than the other two. All three tended to leave slightly visible lines after being washed, similar to many watercolour pencils (in some cases scrubbing at them more with a brush would erase them, but not always). I also found that they all worked well with the sgraffito technique (layering a dark colour on a light colour, then scratching to reveal the light colour) and produced decent effects.

Colour Range and Vibrance

As far as colour range goes, the Caran d’Ache Neocolors are way out at the head of the field, with 126 colours to choose from. These do include some metallics, which will work quite well for fantasy pieces. With a range so large, there are some colours that are very close in hue, but it means that pretty much any colour you could want or need is at your fingertips and ready to go (this could be a good or bad thing, depending on if you’re the sort of person who prefers to mix their own colours or gets confused by a large selection).

Next is the Derwent Artbar with a range of 72 colours (this seems to be Derwent’s magic number as far as full ranges go). Derwent have done something interesting with the packaging of their Artbars by arranging them into four groups; Brights, Pales, Earths and Darks. This might be useful if you want to work with a limited palette; you can just stick to the colours from one section. One of the Artbars is a ‘mixing bar’, sort of like the Colourless Blender in the Prismacolor Pencils range; quite handy for mixing layers without having to smudge them with your finger.

Though the Cretacolor AquaStics originally came in 80 colours, I have been told by a company rep on the Cretacolor Facebook page that the range has been cut back to 40 colours (she said that most of the 80 colours are still available in open stock, but my own online art supply shopping research concluded that this is only true for about half of the colours). Still, even with a significantly shorter range, there is a good balance of colours, so it should still be possible to mix pretty much anything you want (the absence of a nice blueish violet in the 40 set makes me sad because it’s my personal favourite colour, but there is a good range of browns, greens and blues for landscape artists). According to the pamphlet thingy I got in the tin, there were metallic AquaStics as well, but these appear to be among those culled from the range.

All three products offer brilliant, vivid colours, as well as more muted tones. I found that, when washed, they all seemed to have about the same colour concentration; Neocolor 2 was slightly in front, while Artbar was slightly behind, but the difference was negligible.

Quality

Based on their blending capabilities and their lightfastness ratings (end of post), I felt that the Neocolor 2 were the best here (though this could be personal preference), followed by AquaStic and then Artbar. They are all worth playing with, though, as long as you keep in mind the lightfast ratings for each colour. I had the misfortune to get dud sticks in both my AquaStic and Artbar sets (one of my Artbars has what appears to be a vein of sawdust running through it, while one AquaStic is cracked all down the centre and so greasy and squishy it’s like trying to draw with a stick of playdough). I know that all art suppliers are going to have dodgy products slip through the quality checking process occasionally, but it did annoy me, since in both cases, the one affected was one of my favourite or most-used colours.

Price

It’s hard to give a solid comparison here, since I had trouble finding any one supplier who sold all three of these in open stock. Cretacolor AquaStics don’t appear to be available anywhere in Australia in open stock (I spent ages looking but came up empty; if you know of somewhere who sells them, feel free to comment, as I would love to get the full range), but you can get them from the large American online art supply stores for about $1.34, which, even taking into account currency exchange rates, is far cheaper than the other two. A Derwent Artbar will cost you about $2.20 from a local online art store, while a single Caran d’Ache Neocolor 2 will set you back about $2.40. It’s usually cheaper to buy things like pastels and pencils in sets (this is not always the case, you need to do the math before buying), with the exception of the full 126 range of Neocolor 2s; with just 42 colours more than the 84 set, you will pay almost double the amount. The only reason I got a full set was because they were on sale and I had a coupon. Unless you find yourself in the same situation, you’re better off getting a smaller set and then buying extra colours you want individually. The other products’ set prices follow a more logical increase as the size grows.

Lightfastness

Similar to my coloured pencils post, I’ve made two identical charts with these three products to test their lightfastness; again, one will be stuck in my front window for a few months, while the other will be kept in a dark drawer. In terms of advertised lightfastness, both the Neocolor 2s and the AquaStics are pretty good. Both also use the ASTM scale where LF1 is the best, LF2 is still good, down to LF5, which is fugitive. Of the 126 Neocolor 2s, 114 colours receive ratings of LF1 or LF2. All of the AquaStic colours in my 40 tin are considered lightfast, with 18 being LF1 and the other 22 being LF2. I do like that the AquaStics display their lightfast rating on the actual crayons; the other two products don’t. I think art supply manufacturers should make a point of printing the lightfastness information of their products either on the packaging or on the product itself (eg. on the barrel or wrapper). This would make it easier for artists to see at a glance what colours are safe to use for work that will be displayed instead of having to hunt around for a lightfast rating chart.

The Derwent Artbars (which go by the Blue Wool scale from 1-8, with anything over 6 being lightfast) really fall down here. Of the 72 colours, 49 receive ratings of 6 or above, meaning that a full third of the range is not lightfast. This means you need to be really careful when using Artbars for a work you intend to display; I did a drawing/painting with them when I first got them, and was later disappointed to find that most of my favourite colours I used are fugitive.

I’ll leave the charts in their respective places for a month, then scan them and report back in a month with my findings.

Update 10.10.12

Both charts have now been in their respective positions for a month, so it’s time to see how well the pigments have held up. The chart that was kept in a drawer is on the left, and the chart that was stuck to a sunny window is on the right:

  

As expected, the Derwent Artbar has been far more harshly affected by the sunlight, with the purple fading several shades in just a month. It seems that the Primary Blue was also affected, as seen from the blended yellow and blue squares, especially where it was washed; likewise for the red and blue crosshatch test, which has lightened noticeably where the water was applied. Nearly all of the single colour gradated swatches have faded a little, though this does not really show up in the scans.

The Caran d’Ache Neocolor 2s also showed shifts in some colours; most noticeably in the yellow and blue squares, which surprisingly faded even more than the same test in the Artbars; I think the Neocolor 2 blue I used was rated LF3, though strangely it actually seems to have darkened in the individual colour swatch. Fading on the red and blue crosshatch test was also pronounced, with almost all blue fading out of the washed/rubbed areas. The purple and white swatch also seems to have had a slight change in hue, with the purple losing some of it’s ‘blueness’ and shifting more towards a red violet.

I was surprised to see that the Cretacolor AquaStics fared better than the Neocolor 2s, exhibiting the least amount of fading. The colours have lightened slightly where washed, both in individual and mixed colour watches, but they have lightened substantially less than the other brands; the only test where fading was really noticeable was the red and blue crosshatch test.

Update 12.12.12

Here are the charts again after three months (left one kept in shadow, right one taped in a sunny window):

WSCrayons-Shadow3m     WSCrayons-Sunlight3m

Once again, the Derwent Artbar continues to out-fade the other two brands. This is especially noticeable with the purple swatches, which have faded almost out of existence; the orange and green swatches have not fared much better. The layered blue and yellow swatch also shows further signs of degradation.

Most of the Neocolor 2s have not changed that much from the 1 month scan, apart from the blue and the orange; the orange has faded substantially, and both swatches where blue was blended with another colour (layered with yellow and crosshatched with red) show significant further fading. There was also some slight fading of the red in the gradated yellow to red swatch, but this is only really visible when flicking between the scans on the screen.

The AquaStics are still doing the best out of the three; however, though they showed no real signs of fading at one month, they have faded a little at the three month mark (still far less than the other two). The purple shows the most fading, with the red just behind. Less noticeable are the yellow and green, whose fading is only really visible when viewing both on screen. The black swatch has also faded (very) slightly.

Surprisingly, I have also noticed some fading on the test sheet that was kept in shadow; barely visible to the naked eye but noticeable when flicking between scans of the two on my screen, the Caran d’Ache blue has faded slightly, as seen from the plain blue swatch and the blue and yellow layered and blended swatch.

Update 16.3.13

The charts have now been in place for six months, concluding this test. Here they are below:

WSCrayons-Shadow6m     WSCrayons-Sunlight6m

Within the Derwent Artbar range, all colours tested on the swatch sheet other than black have experienced fading to various degrees; previously this was only noticeable in scans, but now it is quite obvious to the naked eye. Almost none of the pigment from the purple Artbar remains, while the blue and orange have also faded noticeably. The red has not really changed since the last check, but the yellow seems to have lost some of its intensity.

Neocolor 2 did better overall, though the blue faded badly both on its own and in the mixed green swatches. The other primary colours all remained true, however the orange continued to fade; in the wash, it fared as poorly as Derwent’s orange Artbar. Purple faded a little, but this is barely discernible to the naked eye. The green crayon overlaid on orange faded, but oddly enough, the green crayon on its own did not.

The AquaStics did the best out of the three products tested, but at the 6 month mark, they too have now suffered some noticeable fading (the frequent heatwaves of 30+ degree days over the last few months probably didn’t help). Red, blue and purple have now faded more severely, as has the green, albeit less substantially.

The Neocolor 2 blue on the sheet that was kept in shadow has also faded a lot more since the 3 month scan, both on its own and in the mixed green swatches; last time it was visible only by flicking between the scans, but now it is obvious even in person.

The tests go to show that even in brands/ranges that are generally regarded as lightfast, you really do need to check the ratings of individual colours, and that some colours will fade even when they are not exposed to direct sunlight.

Advertisements

About Rebecca J Fleming

Some random geek on the Internet who likes playing with coloured things. Also, I like to put Easter eggs in the microwave.
This entry was posted in Fine Art, Graphics, Non-Fiction, Reviews and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Art Supply Comparison: Water-Soluble Crayons and Pastels

  1. Chris R. says:

    Thanks a lot! Very useful, as is the great color pencils comparison. Your lightfastness tests confirm my suspicions (…) that manufacturers’ ratings are not to be trusted, except maybe for the beautiful Caran d’Ache Luminance line.

    I’m planning to do my own multimedia test of deep, dark reds and all things PR101 this summer. Looking forward to your watercolor LF test results (no posts since Jan. 2013?) I hope you’re using the same methodology, which would provide quite a nice way to compare between crayons/pencils/watercolor lightfastness.

    • Hey, thanks for your comment 🙂

      Unfortunately between work and illness I’ve neglected this blog a bit over the last few months. After I did my original charts and posted them on the WetCanvas forum, the member running the test mentioned that the swatches should be bigger (mine are only about 1.5cm by 3cm, whereas the ideal size would be 1in by 3in). Since doing those charts I have also acquired a few more colours, so as soon as I get time, I will be redoing my swatches and starting the test again within the next few weeks. I am thinking I will also group colours by colour rather than by manufacturer. I had forgotten to update my watercolour blog post to reflect this (will do so now!)

      My watercolour testing methodology is different to that used for the pencils and crayons as it was defined by a group on the art forum based on official lightfast testing methods, while the other two were just my own design. It is my hope the watercolour testing methodology will be more effective.

      I have also acquired a few more small sets of coloured pencils, so I need to find a way to add those to my original coloured pencil testing post. I’d be interested in the results for your dark reds.

  2. Pingback: Mixed Media Anthropomorphized Sun Face | karenascofield

  3. sdiamod says:

    Thanks so much for this very comprehensive review! Very helpful

  4. Louise says:

    Great review! Would you say that the water-soluble oil based cretacolor aquastics work best as an underpainting for oil based colored pencils, and the water-soluble wax based neocolor 2’s under wax based colored pencils or do you think it would matter at all?

    • I think as long as the crayon was completely dissolved (so no oily or waxy residue remained), it probably wouldn’t matter what sort of pencils you used over it. If you’re going to use thick layers of the crayon (either oil or wax) I suspect both types of pencil might have trouble adhering well, but I tend to not really mix mediums so I haven’t tried it 🙂

  5. Brilliant review and I totally agree with you about the Artbars and Neocolor IIs. I’m looking to buy the Cretacolor aquasticks to extend my collection and your review helped me a lot!

  6. greengirlgreen says:

    Thank you so much for your comprehensive testing and review. I’ve been trying to decide between the Cretacolor and Caran d’Ache, and your review has helped narrow it down to the Cretacolor.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s