I have always felt that it is prudent to buy the best equipment that you can afford on the basis that painting is hard enough without the added problem of sub-standard or dodgy equipment. However, is this just an illusion or does it really improve your work if you use the best brushes/paper/paints, etc? Is it a placebo effect in play when I reach for my Escode Reserva brushes, feeling that they are the only brushes that makes each stroke look as I want it to? Would I actually get exactly the same effect if I used a bog standard cheap synthetic paintbrush? What part does equipment play in producing your best work? Perhaps it is the same as when I was a beginner and thought that going on a course with a famous artist would somehow give me a fast track into expertise and experience (disillusion quickly followed I might add!). Have I been trapped into thinking that all my fancy equipment is going to make me a better artist and it shores up what little talent I might have? Perhaps I should take a bit of scrap paper, some poster paints and Homebase's best in the brush line and see if I can create anything worthwhile - that would be a challenge. All I would be left with is skill and talent in the raw with no lovely stuff to make it easier or make my work look as good as it can. I have seen some famous artists painting with what looks like a brush intended for a bit of Dulux emulsion and have also seen artists painting on a variety of unusual supports and they often produce some decent stuff. However, perhaps they are just so talented that it doesn't matter, but the less talented or experienced you are, the more you need the fancy equipment. Actually, the idea of having to paint without my brushes/paint/paper of choice does fill me with dread and I don't think I have the courage to try. But it is an interesting thought, isn't it.