Referring to those red fox-hunting jackets as "pinks" raises the additional question of just what the British historically meant when they called something "pink." --Ruth Anne Baumgartner scholar gypsy and amateur costumer
-----Original Message----- >From: Suzi Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Feb 21, 2006 11:39 AM >To: Historical Costume <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Perception of color, Re: [h-cost] Princess Elizabeth > >At 16:01 21/02/2006, you wrote: >>Fabric dyes vary in their resistance to color >>change. Some dyes change color, some just fade, >>some do both. It also depends upon the fabric >>itself; in my experience cottons and linens tend >>to hold their colors better than silks. Wools >>have held their colors well. I had some acetate >>plaid taffeta that changed color while stored in >>a dark closet under fairly constant climatic >>conditions. So synthetics, in my experience, >>have the worst survival characteristics. >> >>Pigments for painting are generally minerals, so >>the colors have a better chance to survive >>intact, although where some organic pigments are >>used, they can fade/change just like >>fabric. There are some minerals that do change >>color due to chemical reactions with air, though >>modern analytic techniques can determine what >>the original mineral was and restore the proper >>color. The usual reason for color changes in >>portraits are the accumulation of dust, soot, >>etc., on the surface and earlier attempts to >>protect the painting with varnish, which often darkens with age. > >According to QEWU "The deep pink gown is >fashionably cut and the material is described in >the records of Edward Vl's collection of pictures >"....the ladye Elizabeth her grace with a booke >in her hande her gowne like crymsen clothe of >golde with workes". Just o confuse matters you >understand. When I was at college we went to see >the portraits at Windsor, and this was always >referred to as the "Pink Princess", which tends >to make me think that we all "saw" it as a pink dress. > >Suzi > >>>Hi, >>>Ah yes, and the purple wheelfarthingale dress i >>>made for Castle Selsø has turned brownish grey :-) >>>Anyway it was a dupioni silk, and they dont >>>hold their colours very long. Dress was exhibited in a room with morning sun. >>> >>>Bjarne >>> >>> >>>>Re the perception of color in these portraits: >>>>For you who do dyeing (Natural or otherwise) did the color of dyed textiles >>>>of the past change because of exposure to sunlight or was there some >>>>chemical element that was not always stable and would mute or even mutate >>>>over a period of time. In the present world, I have seen color changes on >>>>bolts and even garments that have never seen the light of day go entirely >>>>from one color to another. >>>>For instance, there is a certain grey from the middle of the 20th C, that >>>>seems to change to pink within a 40 yr. span. My daughter"s pale blue >>>>taffeta promgown from the 1990s is now a sort of interesting pale rose. I >>>>have a bolt of rayon velvet from the'70s that is presently an interesting >>>>shade of lavender. >>>> >>>>In reference to these portraits under discussion, might the colors on the >>>>canvas have changed, or the garments themselves have been 'changeable'? >>>> >>>>kathleen >>>> >>>> >>>>>Misremembering happens to all of us! <g> Seriously, though, it could be >>>>two >>>>>different copies--I know that some of the portraits of Elizabeth I (as >>>>>queen) and her sister, Mary, were done multipe times--there's that great >>>>>chapter in QEUnlocked that talks about them. So it could be that, >>>>>especially since so many of our details are similar. And maybe it >>>>explains >>>>>why some of the reproductions seem so pink and others more orange? I don't >>>>>know about "yours"--we only had time for the National Gallery of Art >>>>(which >>>>>was on its last day of a Truly Cool Exhibit on Fabric in Portraits), and >>>>>didn't make it over to the Portrait Gallery. Well, maybe we could have, >>>>if >>>>>I hadn't been making a complete pig of myself in the bookstore. <weg> >>>>>I've seen monochrome embroidery done in red in a couple of portraits in my >>>>>books, and a little of it in the Textile Rooms at the V&A. A friend of >>>>mine >>>>>says it's known as "morisco" work (spelling optional at this time of the >>>>>evening ;o) I *think* I've got a copy of a painting of Mary I with red >>>>>embroidery somewhere. I *think.* (sorry...bad case of chocolate cravings >>>>>paired with knitting fatigue from the Knitting Olympics! LOL!) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > > When did you see it in the Portrait >>>>> Gallery? I was in England in > > 2002, >>>>>and >>>>> > > saw the painting at Windsor. The dress was screaming pink, no orange >>>>to >>>>> > > it >>>>> > > at all. >>>>> > > The forepart and undersleeves are made of a gold pile/cream base "cut >>>>>and >>>>> > > voided" velvet, although I suspect that the pile, in this case, is >>>>gold >>>>> > > thread (looks distinctly metallic). >>>>> > > --Sue, wondering if there are two of them out there.... >>>>> > >>>>> > Hmmm...maybe I was mistaken. I know I saw the Princess Mary Tudor >>>>> > portrait while I was there. I thought I saw the Elizabeth one, too. >>>>> > >>>>> > But seeing the Mary Tudor portrait in person was pretty cool because I >>>>> > discovered that her chemise had redwork on >>>>> the cuffs! I hadn't heard > of >>>>> > redwork before then and the photos I had seen of the painting didn't >>>>have >>>>> > enough detail to show it. Very cool! >>>>> > >>>>> > Diana >>>>> > >>>>> > www.RenaissanceFabrics.net >>>>> > "Everything for the Costumer" >>>>> > >>>>> > "Become the change you want to see in the world." >>>>> > --Ghandi > > > >_______________________________________________ >h-costume mailing list >[email protected] >http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
