I'm glad you liked the "blood sausage" painting clip. This is a mini-example of what I was talking about earlier... the painting as a "novel" or as a "short story." For example, this particular painting could superficially be read as a typical monochromatic facile Picassian execution of only passing interest... after all, who cares about modest meals? I appreciated that the owner was actually "into" the work as art and not simply a "handsome object."
This was an excellent example of how a painting relates to a short story or novel. Here's what I find fascinating... a novel has a cover and title to initially engage the viewer whereas the short story many times only has the title; but both are mysterious in that they unfold in time. The time it takes to digest each page and proceed. whereas the painting reveals its "cover," "title," "table of contents" and content all at once. It is almost as if one read a book by simply pressing the book against one's forehead and then reel from the digested memory. Its like a direct injection of a vast amount of information and thus requires viewing time to "tame" the visual cacophony in order to reassemble the transmission.
I do like that in the Picasso work the claustrophobic setting, stark food stuffs, knife, blackout curtain and single light source all contribute to making the occupation rationing and paranoia palpable. The draining of color contributes top the somber late night suffocating mood of the piece.
That is what I find engaging in the (still) on-going "battle" between any form of representation and pure abstraction. This has been going on since before Picasso and Braque started their common venture and exchanged advances and tips/tricks. Neither approach makes the "novel" or "short story" easier to get across. In the end, it doesn't really matter if anyone can "read" it properly. What does matter is that the artist approach it such that the "marks" and "strokes" all culminate in a sensory fabric that isn't "merely" decorative or interesting effects. But anyway... this is a matter that will continue to be an issue for as long as painting is practiced.
As for the graphite issue... in the last 2-3 years there have been various "liquid graphite" mechanical pencils put on the market by various pen/pencil companies such as Pentel, Pentech, Paper Mate and Sharpie. All of these are simply typical gel pens with an erasable grayish ink... of sorts. I've tried them all... because even the smoothest and most robust of mechanical pencils don't deliver enough "lead" fast enough for truly uninterrupted drawing. Hence, my interest in the liquid graphite.
The Derivan Matisse "Liquid Pencil" jars or tubes, while not as convenient as a pencil or stylus... actually offer a unique twist on graphite by being brushable. The medium is thick and gel-like.. so it can really be pushed on the paper and spread and worked into the paper. Now of course... up up close one can discern that the "graphite" has been "spread on" and not rubbed or stroked on; but the water soluble pencil has been around for a long time now and it also is a good tool.
In fact the whole soluble trend has been around since the early 90s. Grumbacher introduced the first oil soluble oils around 1992 or thereabouts. Initial sales were not as expected... hence they went on sale and I bought a monster load... but never did use them (this was around the same time as my purchase of all those Yarka linen canvases).
There are water soluble colored pencils, wax crayons, oil pastels and of course graphite.
Personally... if the budget is the issue... in terms of purchasing one over the other... I would strongly suggest the Lukas Berlin kit... if only because you'd be saving $200 off the suggested retail price point.
