Artists Switch From Labeling Their Paintings Acrylic To *Synthetic Polymer*

English: THAHLES, 2006. Corday. Synthetic Poly...

English: THAHLES, 2006. Corday. Synthetic Polymer and Pigment on raw linen. 72 x 216in. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I wrote and published this article in June of 2012, yet artists are still commenting on it.

Featured it again in 2015, and for a 3rd time October 2016.  Here’s the original article–

I don’t know all the reasons for acrylic shame, but I do know that many galleries and artists have long labeled acrylic paintings as *mixed media* to help increase sales. I’ve also heard stories of art collectors losing interest and walking away from a painting once they learned it was painted with acrylic paints.

Lately, I have noticed a new trend–contemporary artists are labeling their paintings *synthetic polymer* paintings rather than use the dreaded word *acrylic* to describe their work.

I’m thinking of doing the same. Synthetic polymer does sound more advanced, up-to-the-minute, complex. Perhaps *synthetic polymer* as a medium is actually more accurate a description, since *acrylic* does come in many forms other than paint. There are acrylic nails, acrylic fish tanks, acrylic comes in sheets, there are acrylic fibers, and acrylic acids. Just using the word *acrylic* alone in a line description assumes that the reader/viewer of your work will know that refers to artist acrylic paints. As contemporary artists continue to expand the materials they work with it may just be necessary to use *synthetic polymer* to describe the paint used, for accuracy and clarity. What do you think? Are you willing to drop the use of the term *acrylic painting* and start describing your paintings at *synthetic polymer paintings*? If so, why? For more accurate descriptions? Hope to increase sales? Please leave a comment below.

Advertisements