Review of Lukas 1862 oils
I wrote before about some of my experiences with Lukas 1862 oils. I wanted some more time with the paints before completing my review. With these recent sessions, I’ve had my fill of Lukas oils.
Typical for me, I set up the palette on Friday morning (first photo) and used it over the next two days before scrapping it clean and setting it up again.
I used all my Lukas 1862 paints for these sessions:
- top row, left to right: cerulean blue, king’s blue, cobalt green, turquoise
- bottom row: cadmium red light
I only have five colors but I feel that is sufficient for a fair trial.
The following photo shows the palette after Sunday’s session.
I said in my last post about this brand (Lukas has a cheaper line of oils they call Studio) that the Lukas 1862 line is a low-end brand. The defining feature of low-end brands is the low-pigment load of the paints. There is less pigment and more filler in low-end brands than the mid-range or high-end brands. Lukas addresses this by adding wax to their oils, which increases its covering power.
Wax is not a common ingredient in oil paint, but it’s not that unusual either. Wax increases covering power but it also stiffens the paint and makes it more matte.
I’m suspicious of how wax effects the drying of paint layers. I also don’t like the paint’s stiffness. Because of these issues, I won’t use it, even for sketching.
To finish, I don’t recommend any low-end brands and suggest you make your purchases solely based on price. However, the 1862 line’s covering power does differentiate it from its competitors and its price is very competitive. If your budget restricts you to the modestly-priced brands, Lukas 1862 is a standout.
Quality: c-
Price: A
I updated the oil paint brand reference.
Lukas 1862 is not a “low end” brand. The wax is not added to increase coverage but to make the paint dry faster, the wax is a very small percentage, not enough to increase “coverage”. Do your research, judging a brand solely based on price without context is naive.
Literally no commercial paint manufacturer adds things to their paint to speed drying. On the contrary, all or nearly all manufacturers add ingredients to extend the drying time in order to increase shelf life. No, wax is simply an extender. Some artists use wax to provide body to the paint which would otherwise be lacking. But even if Lukas 1862 uses the wax for some legitimate purpose, I still wouldn’t use it because I prefer to add my own ingredients to my paint. I’ve used wax-based mediums in the past and I don’t like them.
Wax makes oil paint short and reduces separation between the vehicle and the pigment. It also can cause issues with solubility (according to one conservator at AMIEN). I don’t know what this solubility issue would be. I also don’t know if adhesion is an issue but some artists worry about wax and adhesion.
Adding wax is probably one way to put more oil into the paint without the paint seeming excessively oily. It’s therefore probably a stabilizing that acts as a support for filler. Aluminum stearate is does the same thing. As far as I know, stearates can migrate to the surface of a paint film over time, causing a whitish haze. I don’t know if wax migrates.
I doubt that wax improves opacity (covering power) much, if at all. It may even do the opposite, by enabling the manufacturer to add more oil to the formulation. Opacity can be increased with other fillers, though.
One approach to wax is to use as small amount as possible to stabilize the paint so it won’t separate badly in tubes (giving them shelf life). This is the approach Michael Harding says he uses. Some artists are wary of any wax at all. One conservator commenting at AMIEN said a very small amount shouldn’t be a problem. How much is needed, though, depends upon the pigment. Ultramarine blue must be stabilized, as far as I know, whenever it’s put into tubes. Wax is one option.
Lukas paints have multiple driers (not uncommon, as one drier is used to speed surface drying and another is used to dry more from within) — but the driers are used rather heavily from what I’ve read. One reviewer said they have a light whipped cream consistency (and that the tubes are light in weight, indicating that blanc fixe is not used heavily as a filler, as that makes tubes heavy). I wonder if alumina hydrate is used for much of that consistency. I also don’t know if alumina hydrate migrates to the paint film surface over time to create a whitish haze and/or if aluminum stabilizers/extenders have issues due to the aluminum. I have read many conservation articles but my memory is not so good.
Contrary to the statement above, in the 1970’s when I sold paint, we did have a product called Japan Drier which we would add 1 ounce per gallon to high gloss oil base trim paint which in effect would speed the dry time without loss of sheen. Boiled linseed oil also has a drier in it, and the boiled linseed oil will extend the flow rate of an oil base paint and the drier aspect is such that it doesn’t change the drying time per binder, vehicle and pigment.
Hi Kenneth,
Commercial painters always tried to speed up the drying time of their paint. One of the effective marketing techniques of the early acrylic manufacturers was to highlight the fast drying time.
What you point out seems to confirm my statement. You added driers to the commercial paint because the paint was not sold with the drier mixed in.
Boiled oil speeds drying time, but that is relative to untreated oil, so I add drier to a medium that uses heated oil.
Go Indians!
I took the time to review the post, and I really feel I need to ask the following:
Mr. Tom, are you on drugs!??
Except for the cold medicine I’ve been taking for the past week, I’m clean, Officer.
Than it must be the fumes from “low end”oils you were using!
Just remember, moderation is the key!