+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Reenactment (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Roman Re-Enactment & Reconstruction (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Thread: Scutum paint (/showthread.php?tid=10211)
Scutum paint - SOCL - 08-18-2007
I am in the process of completely two scuta, one of the Republican and the other Augustan model, but I'm having a dilemma about painting them. I realize that the most accurate paint to use would be milk paint, as guided on the Legio XX website. I have a dilemma, however; one I'm sure isn't particularly unique: the matter of accuracy versus practicability. In this sense, practical for me means something extremely durable and very, very cost efficient--an investment, you might say (one of the reasons I use car wax on the outside of my helmets and segmentatae I use instead of oil!).
Simply put, I've seen many reenactment groups use standard retail latex paint on their scuta instead of the milk paint because it appears to be more durable, especially when it comes to water. By what I've heard, though haven't corroborated personally, is that water tends to stain or otherwise damage the milk-painted surface. I'm aware of the bee wax covering and such to help make the paint water-resistance, but that all seems to start adding up. Then you have the latex paint bit, which seems to do all these things, but at the cost of a certain level of accuracy (although the look remains authentic).
So, does anyone have advice on whether I should use latex or milk paint? Benefits and such?
Re: Scutum paint - maius - 08-18-2007
I was just getting ready to post the same question myself!
I recently heard that there is no historical evidence that milk paint was actually used to paint shields, if true, what would be the most authentic way to go?
Maius/Bill
Re: Scutum paint - SOCL - 08-18-2007
According to the Legio XX website--which cites another source--says, "According to Holger Ratsdorf of HReplikate, the Dura Europas shields and others were painted with casein, a milk derivative."
Although I'm sure the Romans didn't have latex paint like we use today, I'm considering it purely from a practical point-of-view, especially for a kid college student whose funds lean towards paying education expenses and not hobbies, not matter how fantastic they may be. :roll: I suppose central to all of this is the matter of what's more important: absolute authenticity (or as close to possible), or the look of authenticity. This is something that's been debated time and again on these forums, which I believe makes the question all the more relevant...
By the way, does anyone know what sort of paint Deepeeka uses on their scuta?
Re: Scutum paint - sulla felix - 08-18-2007
I have completed two scuta now, one in milk paint sealed with beeswax, and one in latex household paint sealed with matt varnish. You cannot really tell the difference mainly because I covered both with linen before painting. The beeswax covered milk paint actually polishes up shinier than the varnished one.
For what it is worth, I would go with the latex paint for now and make one with milk paint or encaustic paint some time in the future when funds are more readily available. But that is just my opinion of course!
Milk Paint - richsc - 08-18-2007
There was a contributor here some years back going by the name Mirabilis Pictor, who was really encouraging about milk paint and encaustic. Here in Legio XX I was the first to use milk paint and convince Matt Amt that we should use it from here on in. Yes, the surface does get slightly off color with water spots, but not significantly so. Later today I'll take the shield out and take some close ups with the digital cam. We have probably ten shields done this way, some with clear wax on them, some not. But the milk paint is just as durable as the latex (and yes, since latex is plastic it definitely cannot be Roman), even if it seems to crackle at some points.
I also tried encaustic, but haven't had much success: it goes on so well, but when dried starts to flake. I did put in some caunauba wax, which is supposed to be less heat sensitive, which may be why, or just lack of experience using it. Probably another formula would work better.
If you do go with encaustic/wax, DON'T use an open flame for heat: use an electric hotplate. Geez, no idea why the first posters like Pictor did that since they kept warning about wax catching fire. A hotplate is so easy to use and so much safer!
Re: Scutum paint - Marcus Mummius - 08-18-2007
If you put a pot with wax too long on a hotplate it will spontaneously combust after some time! Even without an open flame. Very strange stuff wax
The shields from Illerup were painted with Casein paint too I think.
Christian is the man who know quite a lot on this subject.
Vale,
Re: Scutum paint - Hibernicus - 08-18-2007
When we can choose between two methods and one is more accurate than the other we choose the more accurate. As a result of this we have from time to time completey abandoned the less accurate.
It is much more difficult and expensive when you are a lone Roman or in a small group, so I for one, understand using acrylic paint.
Re: Scutum paint - Matthew Amt - 08-18-2007
Avete!
If the fundamental question is whether to opt for ease or accuracy, then that's a question you'll have to answer for yourself. I have NEVER regretted going for accuracy, but have often regretted going for easy. You may eventually run into a group that does not allow latex paint, so plan for that as well. There are some who might point out that if you are going to plastic-coat your shield, why not use aluminum or plastic armor?
Casein paint really doesn't cost much more than latex. What, about 12 bucks for a bag? Yes, you have to go through the trouble of mixing it with water--that's about as hard as making a bowl of cold cereal. Once the paint is dry, it is essentially indestructible. We have never seen it flake or scratch off, and it cannot be removed even with modern paint removers! Yes, rain will cause slight chalky marks to appear, but a coating of linseed oil or wax prevents that entirely. I like to use Sno-Seal, a wax paste made for waterproofing hiking boots, and available for about 3 bucks at camping supply places. Just smear it on and melt it into an even finish with a hair dryer or heat gun.
There is still some debate about exactly what the Romans used for painting their shields. It's looking like wax encaustic is pretty solidly proven, but casein is still a reasonable option and I don't think there's any reason that ALL Roman shields had to be done the same way. But wax encaustic is NOT easy to apply, and there's obviously quite a learning curve, as it were! Stick with casein, and no one will raise an eyebrow.
Note that casein paint is supposed to be applied to a porous surface, so I don't know if you can paint over a shield that has already been painted with latex. I seem to recall that the Old-Fashioned Milk Paint Company sells some product you can add to your milk paint to make it adhere to a non-porous surface, though, so that might be an option. But do you really want to do something over in the future, when you can do it right the first time? Especially if you are trying to spend as little as possible.
Go with accuracy! Down with latex! Valete,
Matthew
Re: Scutum paint - M. Demetrius - 08-18-2007
Hey, Matt, you know I love ya, man. But somehow, Sno-seal seems a bit of a non-sequitur here...but what do I know? I used acrylic latex, and just mixed in a little white to tint the background color.
http://www.atsko.com/snoseal.html for those who are unfamiliar with this product. Good stuff. I vouch for it.
But and again, and again, I ask the same question. At what point do we draw the lines? Heck, marine spar varnish would seal my shields for years of continued outdoor exposure. I don't use that, but the point stands.
If encaustic paints are ruled to be the "real thing", shouldn't we likewise abandon casein paints along with craft store acrylics and paint store "latex" (which is almost never latex in the US due to allergic reactions of some to latex) house paints? Please don't think I'm just creating an endless argument, because I'm not intending to do so. I'll probably just keep on painting my own shield with whatever paint is at hand. Call me a farb, folks, it doesn't hurt any more.
I also use power tools when it makes sense to do so, and don't harvest and dry my own wood from the forest, or manufacture all my own tree felling saws, carpentry tools, tan my own leather, smelt my own iron blooms. I use an oxyacetelyne torch to rough cut and sometimes to heat metal for one reason or another. I don't always fire up the coal forge. Not because I can't, but because I don't want to spend all the time and money to do so (and chances are, the Romans didn't use coal forges all that much [and I don't mine my own coal], instead relying on charcoal--which I likewise don't manufacture, I buy lump charcoal in bags). To me, that makes sense.
I buy tools at Home Depot (and junk stores, sometimes, garage sales) and leather from Tandy's, fur when deemed needful from commercial tanneries, and they ship it on real gasoline powered trucks right to my door. I buy fabric woven and spun at commercial mills, dyed with who knows what kind of dyes sometimes, because I can't afford hand spun and hand woven at this point. I use chrome-plated Ghinger scissors to cut the fabric into clothing parts. So I disqualify myself from being a genuine purist. Oh, well.
I'm just asking the question. From what I've read, wax-based encaustic paints are probably the 1st Century answer to the need for permanent, exterior paints. Again, it's a question for the individual to make his mind up about, isn't it? It makes me sad when a leader or member from a group far, far away from the writer casts disparaging comment on a fellow reenactor, which usually leads to discouragement and eventual disinterest. I've seen and heard and been on the bad end of plenty of that...mostly because I ask questions, or make statements found in various sources, some of which turn out to be wrong with further research.
How many times has someone posted pictures of some really amazing object that they've made, having spent considerable time and money to produce, to have someone reply, "Oh, well, you used -------- so that makes it inauthentic because" blah, blah, the alloys exhumed from the tomb of --, obscure source doc, conjecture of Professor Sounding Brass, etc., and totally deflating a precious proud moment. I'm not saying anyone in this conversation is doing that here and now. But we've all seen it. Maybe I'm just still feeling grumpy. Oh, well, I'll shut up now, and watch and see.
Re: Scutum paint - SOCL - 08-18-2007
The accuracy argument seems to be the strongest one, in my mind. I can certainly see the benefits and points of doing it as accurate as possible the first time so that the first time around is the only time around, and that seems to be the direction I'm leaning. It's not so much a matter of the work, but the upkeep and the cost that has me debating this particular point. I think, despite my want to go with ease, I'll likely end up erring on the side of accuracy.
In looking into the milk paint, I found a place not too far from where I live, in Springfield, VA, that carries milk paint. According to their website they carry both the powder Old Fashioned brand and another brand called "General Finishes", the latter premixed and comes in a can. Does anyone know the differences between the two?
Re: Scutum paint - M. Demetrius - 08-18-2007
You have made a good choice, Saul, and it is good that you have chosen the direction toward what we regard as accuracy! Kudos and a laud point for you!
Re: Scutum paint - SOCL - 08-18-2007
Actually, I'd missed your post somehow, David! Your points are all the same ones I had in mind. And here's something else: I'm making a Republican scutum and an Augustan scutum, so what if we find out they painted Republican ones with some mixture of blood and berries? Does that mean I should go out and slaughter my neighbors annoying dog to paint my Republican, but have to buy a separate paint entirely for the Augustan shield? A little outlandish, but the point stands.
That's not to say I don't plan on using the milk paint, but it's going to get costly since the shields are each being painted differently colors, which is also going to get costly. Not to mention the fact the Augustan one requires red, yellow, and white (and black?). At that point, I have to start to wonder how my expenses are going to add up versus using inexpensive acrylic. You know?
I'm still open to opinions on all sides. I want to be able to make the most educated decision I can.
Re: Scutum paint - M. Demetrius - 08-18-2007
I might be able help with that part...how annoying is your neighbor's dog? On a scale of 1 to 10. :lol:
And you'll have to use genuine, imported Italian berries, of course. :roll:
Re: Scutum paint - Marcus Mummius - 08-18-2007
No offense meant, David, but some of the points you make are drawn out of perspective IMHO :wink:
The caseïn paint we use is actualy a lot cheaper than modern paint! We buy powdered pigment and caseïn powder. And you have to mix up these indegrients yourself. This way you can also choose to use pigments that were available to the romans and you don't have to depend on premade mixtures.
Vale,
Re: Scutum paint - maius - 08-18-2007
David, i thought you made some great points in your previous post. I have been reenacting for 20 years and can relate to everything you said.
Laudes.
Maius/bill