For years, the watercolor crowd has treated sable and squirrel brushes like royalty. If you don’t have a Kolinsky, are you even a “real” painter? I get the love, those brushes hold water beautifully, and the snap is hard to mimic. But lately, I’ve found myself reaching for synthetic brushes more and more, and the old myths about them just don’t hold up.
Modern synthetics, especially the ones from brands like Escoda and Princeton, have come a long way. My Princeton Neptune mop holds almost as much wash as the real thing, but costs a fraction and doesn’t shed. Even detail work feels less precious when you’re not worried about ruining an expensive brush. I abuse my synthetic rounds with masking fluid, gouache, and the occasional ink, stuff I’d never risk on sable.
The supposed “inferiority” of synthetics is mostly nostalgia at this point. Synthetic fibers are more consistent, so you avoid those oddball hairs that wreck a fine line. They dry faster, which matters if you paint daily and hate waiting for brushes to be ready again. I also notice I feel free to experiment, knowing my tools aren’t fragile or irreplaceable.
If you’re chasing the perfect granulation or painting loose botanicals, synthetics handle rougher paper without splitting. I use cheap synthetic flats on Arches cold press for juicy spring florals and get crisp edges every time. The only real limitation is with huge washes, but even there, synthetic blends are closing the gap.
So yes, the classics have their place, but treating synthetic brushes as “student” tools is out of touch. They encourage risk, handle abuse, and open up creative avenues. If you haven’t tried a high-end synthetic lately, you’re missing out on the watercolor revolution sitting right under your nose.