then his painting wouldn't have looked like this.
This image is of a picture I printed onto cloth using acrylic transfer. It's my second try and I actually listened to the instructions this time. As you can see if you click on the image and then enlarge it, there are spots where I didn't get all the paper rubbed off (the child's foot on the left, for instance) and spots where I rubbed too hard - many of them. I scanned in the finished image and it actually reproduced quite well. The violet colour in the background is intentional; the cloth was dyed using wet tissue paper over the cloth before I printed onto it. I was pleased to find that the colour didn't fade while I was rubbing at the paper and splashing on quite a lot of water.
Although I knew about the method of transferring images using acrylic get, I wasn't motivated to try it until I took a class from Ken Flett. The class was in Bear River, Nova Scotia, not Port Alberni, B.C., and covered other subjects as well.
As for the painting, it came from "The National Gallery [Trafalgar Square] Illustrated Catalogue", published in 1908. My copy is without a cover, and is pretty tattered. Google Books has a few copies but there are no previews at all. An earlier edition, "Illustrated catalogue to the National gallery. Foreign schools", so not the same paintings at all, is there with full text. They are neat books to look through, if only to make you want to see the original painting.
The picture in the book I have was titled "Virgin and Child, with St. John". I found a copy on the National Gallery web site after much searching, once I figured out that the title was incorrect in the catalogue. Here it is, in full colour. There is really good magnification, showing the background much better than my copy does. This website is an excellent art site by the way; there are many, many very good images of paintings, including 27 by Rembrandt.
