Opinions on masonite and other grounds for oils

[Richard Bingham]

In the grand scheme of things, the jury is still out on panels made from wood fiber particles or "flour". 500+ years of oil painting (and woodworking) has abundantly demonstrated the performance of "real" gesso (RSG, gypsum & whiting) over solid wood, both for the outstanding permanence of such panels when properly constructed, and for the likliest failure modes when not.

Since panels made from particulate matter have no inherent structural integrity (as the annular rings provide in solid wood) "masonite" panels have shown warp or deformation in the relatively short time they have been commercially available (around 70 years at most). Another difficulty is that while it's pretty easy to determine the exact composition of a gessoed poplar panel, the specifics of resins, fibers, and methods of production are all over the map when one identifies a panel as "masonite". "Masonite" as we currently know it comprises a wide range of panel stocks of different composition, density, weight and absorbency. Since easel paintings aren't usually subjected to very severe conditions, most will probably perform very well over reasonable periods of time.

Dibond or Alumalite panels promise to be far better structurally over the long-haul, since they are extremely stable and rigid, and owing to the laminations of light guage aluminum certainly will not warp or sag of their own weight, or due to ambient change. The only thing that would sink them would be the eventual deterioration/decomposition of the polyethylene core material.

[Richard Budig]

I have used masonite-like hard board for some years with no problems. I would urge that you use UNTEMPERED hardboard. In the old days, when real Masonite was still being made and sold, it came in a TEMPERED and an UNTEMPERED version. Tempered Masonite contained an oil finish for outdoor use. This hot oil finish could/would leach out and attack your painting. The untempered version had no oil treatment, and thus, left nothing behind to attack your materials.

Nowadays, I can't find Masonite, so I use "hardboard" from lumber yards, Menards, Lowes, and other places like these.

Unlike many who work hard to produce a glass-smooth painting surface, I tend to leave "tracks," bumps and bubbles in my surface. I sand the smooth surface of the panel to rough it and to produce a mechanical bond for the gesso, and then apply several coats of gesso in a rather sloppy, sketchy way. Sometimes, I apply the gesso with large palette knife, or I'll press balled-up Saran Wrap into the wet gesso in order to create some texture.

But, regardless of surface preparation, I have had no problems using these panels. The rough surface I leave behind tends to wear brushes a little faster than canvas, but for a quick, easy, and cheap working panel, you can't beat these for studies, as well as finished works. I feel that by buying 4X8 foot sheets and cutting my own panels, my "cost per working panel" is around 50 cents each. Compare that to the several dollars of a regular canvas, and it certainly makes economic sense to use them for studies, or other exploratory work.

[Richard Bingham]

Originally Posted by Richard Budig

. . . it certainly makes economic sense to use them for studies, or other exploratory work.

That sensible distinction is too often lost when discussing the "archival" properties of a panting support. Do you use "real" gesso (whiting, gypsum & RSG) or are you referring to the various acrylic products sold as a painting ground and generically identified as "gesso"? Most are abrasive in the extreme, and can really eat up brushes!

[Richard Budig]

Richard . . . so sorry to be so long answering your gesso question.

I use acrylic gesso, and your are dead right . . . the gritty texture it leaves behind is mighty hard on brushes. But, it is this same grittiness that also leaves behind more of that "draggy" feel one gets from canvas.

I have never sanded my panels smooth in an effort to attenuate this harshness. I have, however, applied a much thinned sizing (with RSG) because it was said that sizing would eliminate this harmful drag. It did eliminate the drag, alright, but it also turned the surface of the panel into a very slick surface.

I'm talking about using a much thinned size on the surface of the acrylic gesso. Thus, the size is "on top," so to speak. I have since stopped this sizing step. I have decided that I will suffer the way acrylic gesso harms brushes in favor of the small cost of the panel as opposed to the larger cost of an equal sized canvas.