RE: "Artefact" - original painting in acrylics and oils
I just find oils are usually way more attractive. I have tried several mediums but I probably have a huge emotional attachment to oils and graphite as pure medium. I have personal preferences for musical instruments, dance, and ritual forms too. The comparison roots back to my mother moving me from acrylics to oils when I was about 17 years old. She spilled some plain oil into water to demonstrate that they do not mix without an emulsifier of some kind. She also pointed out that although the water has a placid reflection the oil makes a rainbow. I still find the oils harder to use but the effects are always better.....unless I really want an acrylic effect. I sort of "draw" with the acrylics so they are great for sketching but oils are truly imagination made manifest for me. Each ,medium does have it's distinctive advantages but the smell, feel, and pliability of oil are just in a thing their own. I find it is really relaxing to just paint with oil, almost meditative.
Now that is something I can definitely relate to, an attachment to something, a personal preference. I for instance love the smell of turpentine, lavender oil, dammar varnish and all that... although I know not all of it is good for your health.
I own one of Peter's paintings and at least for the sky, to me there is no way of telling if it was done in oil or acrylics. A real masterpiece and one of my biggest treasures.
American painter Kris Kuksi showed me how to do a glaze with acrylics. He did a portrait of me in acrylics in way most people wouldn't be able to do in oil.
Just two reasons, why I would be reluctant to say one is superior to the other. Stating "I like one more than the other" however is a whole different story 😀