Comparing Pigments: Winsor & Newton Brown Madder, PR206 vs. PR179

It’s been a tough couple of years for pigments. With carmakers, the biggest consumers of pigments, evolving their standard color offerings, many pigments are no longer “popular”. As such, they’ve been discontinued. One of those discontinued pigments was none other than PR206 — one of my most-used colors. A wine-dark, transparent red, this Quinacridone pigment goes by many names: Quinacridone Maroon, Quinacridone Burnt Scarlet, Brown Madder, etc. It is a useful color in many mixed pigment paints as well; most notably, Winsor & Newton’s Permanent Alizarin Crimson.

As this pigment is no longer available, paint manufacturers are migrating their stocks to use a similar pigment: PR179, also known as Perylene Maroon. This pigment is a deep, transparent, earth red, very similar in nature to its PR206 cousin.

Just how similar is it, though? Well, today I am taking a look at the properties of these two pigments and sharing my thoughts with you!

The Paints

For this exercise, I’m comparing apples to apples — the PR206 and PR179 versions of Winsor & Newton’s Brown Madder paint. All tests were performed on Saunders Waterford natural cold-press paper.

The manufacturer’s properties of these two versions of the paint are identical; both are listed as Series 1, Lightfastness A (extremely permanent), staining, non-granulating, and semi-transparent.

While these stats are important, each pigment has its own characteristics and will behave differently in various circumstances.

Swatch

I always start exploring a color with a swatch!

At first glance, the colors are very, very similar. Only upon looking more closely do the differences begin to appear.

The first thing I noticed is that PR179 is just a touch cooler and maybe a hair less transparent than PR206. As is typical of quinacridones, PR206 has this inner glow effect that is absent from the PR179 variant. And while this is not easily apparent in these swatches, I found the masstone of the PR206 version to be much richer and deeper — the PR179 version went no darker than what is seen in this swatch.

There’s one major difference that I noticed immediately when I began swatching: this PR179 Brown Madder is much, much more prone to cauliflowering than almost any other paint I’ve seen. My first attempts at creating a smooth wash were met with this pushing back of pigments when grading out the swatch. As you might be able to tell from the smoother swatches shown above, I had to rework the swatch several times before drying to create the smooth transition. This is not something I’m accustomed to doing!

Paint Properties

For each paint, I tested its dispersion in plain water wet-in-wet, transparency over a pen mark (please excuse the mud on this — the ink wasn’t fully dried yet!), and glazing.

Both paints performed similarly, with only slight differences noted:

Mixes

Most commonly, I use this color in landscape mixes. Put with a warm blue like Ultramarine or Cobalt, Brown Madder will create interesting effects against granulation. I love to use these colors in distant mountains or tree lines, so whipped up a quick test of this.

• PR206 has noticeably less tinting strength, leading to softer mixes
• PR206 seems to glow through the French Ultramarine. In contrast, PR179 seems to settle into the paper more, so that the Brown Madder is less present compared to the Ultramarine particles
• PR179, when tapped into the damp swatch, holds its own. It shows more concentration and less dispersion when compared to the PR206 version, which disperses more readily
  

I also use this color to compose skin tones. Mixed with some Yellow Ochre or Burnt Umber (depending on the complexion) and a touch of Cobalt or Cerulean, this color gives just the right amount of warmth to the skin without overpowering.

This test involved mixing on the paper — laying down quick dabs of yellow ochre, cobalt, and brown madder. Both colors seemed to perform equally well in my tests! I can’t discern any appreciable difference here.

Glazing

Glazing is another common usage for this paint. Rocks, clay, desert scenes — Brown Madder glazed over an orange earth color, like this Burnt Sienna example, gives a lovely depth and glow.

This test really shows the differences in transparency and masstone clearly:

• PR206 masstone rests deep and dark on the left, and washed out smoothly to a bright, soft overlay
• PR179 feels flat in comparison. The orange of the Burnt Sienna does not show through as readily, like it does in the PR206 variant
  

Conclusion

I am of mixed feelings on this, and I think your usage of this color will really determine whether PR179 is a successful replacement for PR206.

I mostly use this color for glazing and in mixes, so the stark differences in transparency and blends makes PR206 a clear winner in my book.

If you feel the same, you can still find PR206 in Daniel Smith’s Quinacridone Burnt Scarlet — from my testing, this has essentially identical performance to Winsor & Newton’s old Brown Madder formula. But make sure you stock up, as this pigment is discontinued and will no longer be available once pigment supplies run out.

What do you think? Do you prefer one pigment over the other? Have you discovered any suitable alternatives? Comment below and share your thoughts!