Inspiration from Artists Week 133 Featuring Artists : Phil Greenwood and Billy Showell.

She is undoubtedly a hugely skilful artist and very precise and accurate in her work. It seems these days many artists are seeking looseness in their painting, and she obviously isn’t attempting that, and nor should she as a botanical artist and illustrator.  I see she has a range of her own paints, brushes etc, also online tutorials, and I sure is very successful.  I can appreciate her work and skills, but not really my thing. To end on a positive , I do like Dixie’s first flower choice, and the single daisy with shadow.

Tessa raises an interesting point - time and again, you see tutors and would-be tutors (many of whom, let us be honest, are engaging in teaching because their art isn't necessarily putting enough food on the table or drinks in the 'fridge, but I digress [often] ) urging us all to loosen up; loose paintings, or as they sometimes call them "painterly" paintings - by which I presume they mean not much more than that you can tell the result is a painting and not a photograph - is what we're all supposed to aspire to do. Now and then, I wonder about that; I wonder if some of us don't believe that the Impressionists got it right, we prefer their work to more academic studies, and that's how we aspire to paint.  There's a distinguished US painter I've mentioned before, in different contexts, who wrote the book Traditional Oil Painting (Virgil Elliott): I've been disturbed now and then by his dismissal of, e.g., Cézanne - and he certainly has no time for Picasso, not that Picasso was an Impressionist.  He thinks that artists took a wrong turn with Impressionism, and any move away from the traditions of European painting - Lord knows what he makes of Hockney, I'm too nervous to ask him. All I would say is that it's a point of view - Impressionism itself is quite a whiskery old movement by now, we've had Expressionism, neo-classicism, surrealism, no doubt there's any number of other isms that I've not encountered or have forgotten, possibly with good reason.   My point (asking myself that very question - what IS my point?) - I think it's basically that because looseness is the dominating theory of the day, informs much art criticism (or did: art critics have moved on from representational work of any kind, which is why we get critics like Jonathan Jones praising the work of a comedian-turned "artist": personally, I wish he'd stuck to the merry quips and banter...), and is what tutors tend to teach, we might be in danger of adopting it as an unfailing mantra; i.e. it's GOT to be loose to be good.   And I don't think that's true - but between "good", and "what I like", there's usually quite a large gap.  I DO prefer loose painting, and I suppose mine might be.... I'm not sure they are; possibly more "incompetent" than "loose", but - I never said that.  

A breathtakingly good artist, whose art precisely matches the requirements of her chosen profession.  Do I like and admire it?  You bet I do. Luckily for us, we art lovers are spoilt for choice.   I tend to like art where the artist has his/her own recognisable style.   Artists like Modigliani, Lautrec, and all the other Bert and Betsy Bloggs whose names I can't remember right now...including many contemporary artists.  I don't share the views of Virgil Elliot, that Robert mentioned.  I want to see traditional fine art being practised, preferably by modern artists just to get away from all the religious paintings. I want the best of everything (not a big ask, is it?)   And this ladies botanical art is sublime.

I was not suggesting that she should loosen up for one moment. She is obviously achieving great precision and that is her style.  Incidentally, I couldn’t find the latest Spam thread, so apologies for this, but there are two entries on the gallery, one today re Digital Gold, and the other added to the lovely work of Suzette Landau from 17 September. Could someone shift please or is this a job for Dawn? Thanks

It’s a job for Dawn, moderators can’t remove gallery postings! She’s not back until Monday… we don’t get many on the spam postings on the gallery fortunately, but it could be a concern if that changed!

Thanks chaps. I will pass on to Dawn.

Tessa - know that; didn't think you were suggesting anything particularly about the artist, it was a general thought not specific. 

It was indeed a general thought. I have been to a couple of art groups over the years where the tutor recommended ‘loosening up’, and as Dixie said it seems to be the mode of the moment. I think for me, whatever style one aims at, drawing is the underlying factor and base of any art, and I need literally to get back to the drawing board!

I try to draw every day, and enjoy it, so no penance.  I doubt if I'd be able to paint if I didn't draw first - and it's interesting (well, interesting to me, anyway!) that while we're so often encouraged to loosen up in our painting, those who draw to the level of finished pieces for sale or display are rarely loose at all: so you can be doubly out of fashion - if you're not very fond of painting loosely, and at the same time draw without ultra-precision....   I like to draw loosely - rarely having the patience, or inclination, to erase highlights, burnish graphite, employ architects' pen or pencils with two inches of needle sharp lead showing - I'm not fond of such exercises as the Loomis method, either; hence, my art teacher used to caution me against "drawing round the houses"; but I still did, when he wasn't looking, because I thought his drawings very stiff and stilted.  (I wouldn't have said that while he was alive - I was as fond of him as you can be of a teacher.) I'm resistant to any rigid rules, but when Ingres called drawing "the probity of art", when Michelangelo told his assistant to "draw, draw, draw, and don't waste time" - I think they had it right.  When we're starting out, I think it's fair enough for tutors to suggest we loosen up - anything to prevent that tight, rigid grip of the pencil and the fear of making mistakes.  Later on though, when we have more miles on the clock, I do think we've got to please ourselves and not feel we have to observe prescriptions: whether other people like our approach or not only matters if you're determined to sell everything you produce to a public that expects it of you; and I should hate that - where's the fun in it?  Doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to improve techniques - I keep trying to do that; keep failing; so - try again; but don't, as an old lady I once knew would say, "fly into a fantod about it" - it may be a touch childish, but if anyone suggests to me that I might loosen up, I shuffle my feet, look mulish, and mutter "shan't!"; anyway, if I were any looser I'd fall apart...   I don't say it's bad advice, but it isn't always appropriate - loose, tight, precise, allusive: tutors guide us, but the best ones don't try to dictate a style with which we're uncomfortable.   Apologies for running on, probably vaguely, I'm out of bed when I should be in it, snoozing, but the neck arthritis had other ideas....