painting tutorials, courses, tips & techniques

‘To say to the painter, that Nature is to be taken as she is, is to say to the player, that he may sit on the piano.”
James McNeill Whistler

James McNeill Whistler (1834- 1903) was a remarkably modern painter for his time. His paintings are carefully designed, tonal and strikingly contemporary.

Opinionated, rebellious and a natural showman, Whistler helped prepare the way for abstraction. His opposition to the art establishment was both part of his genius and, ultimately, part of his downfall.

Tate Britain, London, has the first major European exhibition of Whistler’s work in 30 years, a retrospective devoted to the American-born artist. It brings together his world-famous portraits and nocturnes, alongside rarely or never-seen works, and I was fortunate enough to catch it last week.

I’ve always had a particular fondness for Whistler, and living in St Ives gives me a rather special reminder of his connection to the town whenever I walk over Barnoon on my way to the post office. Whistler came to St Ives in January 1884, accompanied by his pupil and studio assistant Walter Sickert and the artist Mortimer Menpes. Although his stay was brief, his presence forms a fascinating part of the town’s artistic history.

I walked to Tate Britain from Pimlico Station, approaching along the banks of the Thames. It is a lovely way to arrive because you begin to notice the reflected light on the water and some of the same atmospheric subjects that Whistler explored in his paintings.

There’s hoarding around the front of Tate Britain while the gallery redevelops its garden, so I wasn’t able to enter by the main steps. I’ve such a strong memory of sitting and sketching on those steps when I was a student, but this time the entrance was around the side of the building.

Before entering the exhibition, you can purchase an audio guide for £5. It offers short commentaries as you move through the galleries, although you’ll need to bring your own headphones, as these aren’t provided. Unfortunately, the batteries in my headphones had gone flat, so I didn’t listen to it during my visit. Instead, I enjoyed working through it on the train journey home, where it was a great way to reflect on the exhibition after seeing the paintings in person.

Whistler’s Studio

The exhibition begins with Whistler’s studio. I had expected the display to be arranged more strictly chronologically, but the first room instead introduces his working environment, materials and artistic influences.

Immediately on the left is a greatly enlarged reproduction of a painting showing Whistler in his studio. Although it isn’t an original painting, the enlargement is very useful because you can get up close to it and study the character of the painted surface.

You can really see the fluidity of Whistler’s brushstrokes.

The original painting is also on display.

Having recently worked on the Van Gogh course, with its intense colour, thick marks and strong textural contrasts, it was fascinating to compare this with Whistler’s approach. His paint is often applied extremely thinly. The texture frequently comes from the surface beneath, with areas rubbed back and covered with delicate veils of colour. His palette is also much more muted and restrained.

In this first room, you can see examples of Whistler’s brushes, his wooden palette and his easel. Unfortunately, there is no paint remaining on the palette, but the brushes are particularly interesting because some have exceptionally long handles.

Whistler’s Brushes – notice the extended handle length

A long-handled brush allows the artist to stand further back, making it easier to observe the subject and the canvas at the same time. It also encourages freer, more fluid arm movement.

Pro tip: The brushes reminded me of the long-handled brushes used by Joaquín Sorolla, which are displayed in his studio in Madrid.

One detail that is easy to miss is a small drawing tucked away in a corner of the room. It formed part of a series of sketches Whistler made in an area of London with a busy dock. The series focuses on views of city life, rather than depicting London’s famous monuments, he chose to celebrate the everyday beauty of working docks, warehouses and shipping.

Black Lion Wharf, Etching
James McNeill Whistler, 1859

In the drawing, a man is shown in profile, looking across the composition rather than towards us. This becomes particularly interesting later in the exhibition when you encounter Whistler’s Mother. Black Lion Wharf is thought to be the framed image hanging on the wall behind Whistler’s mother. Interestingly, the profile figure within that print echoes the pose of his mother, quietly linking the two works.

There is a note about this connection in the gallery, but it would be very easy to overlook. It is worth spending a little time with the drawing before moving on.

The first room also contains objects that Whistler kept in his studio, including a collection of porcelain.

These pieces reflect Whistler’s deep interest in Japanese art, Asian ceramics and Japanese prints, influences that became integral to his sense of composition and design.

There are interesting parallels here with Van Gogh, who was also profoundly influenced by Japanese printmaking.

Sakurajima Volcano c.1856, Woodblock Print on Paper
Utagawa Hiroshige 1797 – 1858

In many Japanese prints, the composition is organised into flattened planes, with unusual cropping and simplified areas of tone. You can see how these ideas helped Whistler develop the modern, highly structured compositions for which he became famous. He helped promote Hiroshige amongst his London and Paris circles. Even his famous butterfly signature reflects this interest in Japanese aesthetics.

Whistler chose the butterfly motif as a signature in the 1860’s. The ‘J’ was the body of the butterfly, and the ‘W’ the wings.

The Early Years

By the age of fourteen, James McNeill Whistler already knew he wanted to become a painter.

Born in Lowell, Massachusetts, in 1834. He had been a temperamental child, and his mother, Anna, recognised that drawing helped to calm his mood.

Taking private art lessons, James enrolled in the Imperial Academy of Arts at age eleven, where he followed a classical curriculum of drawing from casts and live models and studied other artists’ techniques. 

Shortly afterwards, when his father died from cholera, his mother had to raise two sons, living frugally on a very limited income. Although Anna recognised Whistler’s artistic ability and understood his ambition, she was determined that he should develop discipline and a strong work ethic, so she sent him into military training, following in his father’s footsteps.

It proved to be a poor fit. Whistler regularly broke the rules and was eventually dismissed.

Sketches on the Coast Survey Plate, 1854
James McNeill Whistler

He found work drawing maps; it was here he learned the etching technique that later proved invaluable to his career. But to his mother’s frustration, he struggled to settle and at the age of twenty-one, eager to escape his mother’s guidance, Whistler moved to Paris to study art. 

He left America and never returned.

Paris

Whistler Self-portrait, 1859

Paris allowed Whistler to embrace a bohemian lifestyle, surround himself with artists including Gustave Courbet, Édouard Manet and Henri Fantin-Latour, and immerse himself in the lively cafés and studios of the French capital.

These artists were starting to turn away from classical sentimental painting subjects, instead depicting ordinary life and observing working people.

La Mère Gérard,1858 – 1859
James McNeill Whistler

Among them, realist painter Courbet had perhaps the greatest influence on the young Whistler. His celebration of everyday subjects and the removal of unnecessary detail strongly appealed to him.

Above, La Mère Gérard, an elderly woman who sold flowers on the streets of Paris, regards the viewer with one penetrating eye, the other sightless. The varied brushwork in this painting shows an influence of 17th-century masters, and Courbet admired this work.

You can see the small scale of La Mère Gérard, in the gold frame on the left.

At the Piano, 1859
James McNeill Whistler

Hung opposite Whistler’s Mother is an earlier painting centred around a piano. Here, you can already see several of the ideas that would continue to interest him. The figure is shown in profile at the piano, while a framed picture hangs on the wall behind. His interest in flat perspectives, framing devices and carefully organised shapes was already beginning to emerge. Some of these earlier works have a more visibly textured surface than his later pictures. 

Although ‘At the Piano’ was rejected by the Paris Salon for being too modern, it marked an important step in Whistler’s development.

London

Seeking a less conservative artistic environment, Whistler moved to London, settling in Chelsea among fellow artists and writers, including Dante Gabriel Rossetti.

By this point, he was an accomplished socialite and dandy. He was witty, charismatic and often argumentative. Rossetti even joked about his sharp tongue in verse.

Whistler had little interest in society’s expectations of how an artist should live or paint. He lived openly with his mistress and favourite model, Joanna “Jo” Hiffernan, who became the subject of his celebrated painting The White Girl.

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl, 1861-63 (Not in the exhibition)
James McNeill Whistler

Unlike the sentimental narrative paintings that dominated the Royal Academy, The White Girl was intended as a study of colour, arrangement and harmony. Rather than a traditional portrait. 

Joanna’s distant, unreadable expression unsettled critics who searched unsuccessfully for a story within the painting, and the Royal Academy rejected it.

Instead, the painting was accepted for the famous Salon des Refusés in Paris in 1863, where it caused a sensation. Whistler, never one to miss an opportunity, capitalised on the controversy by hiring men to walk the streets carrying sandwich boards advertising:

“Go and see The White Girl, the great scandal of the Royal Academy.”

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl, 1864
James McNeill Whistler

Here Whistler paints Jo Hifferman leaning on the fireplace of their home in Chelsea.

I especially enjoyed studying the way he painted lace and delicate fabrics. He used very thin veils of paint, with small touches and dabs of more opaque colour placed over the top. The effect is understated but remarkably convincing.

To create these fluid layers, Whistler used a painting medium he referred to as his “sauce”. It was a mixture of turpentine, linseed oil and varnish.

Traditional turpentine was needed to dissolve the varnish and combine the ingredients. The resulting medium had a fluid, watercolour-like consistency, but contained enough turpentine to allow the paint to move freely. The (over) use of turpentine means some areas have sunken into the canvas surface and can create a particularly tricky painting for conservation.

This enabled Whistler to apply thin, watery-looking washes that still held together on the canvas. When working with such delicate layers of oil paint, that sense of flow would have been essential to achieving the softness, subtlety and tonal unity of his finished paintings.

Symphony in White, No. 3, 1865- 1867
James McNeill Whistler

Jo wears the same white dress as in the portrait before. Seated on the floor is model Milly Jones. Whistler intended this to be a study of colour, an experiment in white on white.

This is the first time he gave portraits a musical title.

Throughout his career, Whistler rejected sentimental storytelling in favour of harmony, colour and design. He gave many of his paintings musical titles, including Nocturne, Symphony and Arrangement; this was to encourage viewers to appreciate his paintings for their handling of paint, balance of colour and abstract design, rather than searching for a narrative.

Nocturnes

Nocturne: Blue and Gold, Old Battersea Bridge, 1872–1875
James McNeill Whistler

Fascinated by the subdued hues of the sea at dusk, Whistler went further with a series of colour studies in London; he called these the Nocturnes.

Atmosphere rather than story. Beauty created through colour and line, harmonies of white and grey. London’s smog and mists, landscapes through an ‘envelope’ of light and atmosphere.

Nocturne: Blue and Silver, Chelsea, 1871
James McNeill Whistler

Whistler is said to have laid the canvases on the floor and soaked them in thin paint, to create these hazy mists, using long strokes and delicate light reflections on the water, looking across the Thames.

Nocturne: Blue and Silver – Cremorne Lights, 1872
James McNeill Whistler

Objects blend into the darkness, leaving only a few glowing specs of lamplight or reflections on the water

Nocturne: Blue and Gold – Southampton Water, 1872
James McNeill Whistler

What amazed me about the nocturnes was just how compressed the tonal range was within the paintings. The gallery space lighting was low, but even with that, sometimes you really had to stare into the painting to see the differences in the subjects being depicted.

Whistler’s Mother

In the middle of his glamorous and unconventional life in London, everything changed.

Escaping the American Civil War, his deeply religious mother, Anna, came to live with him. Anything that might offend her disappeared, including Jo Hiffernan, who quietly moved out.

His studio remained firmly Whistler’s domain, but his flamboyant lifestyle now had to be conducted much more discreetly. In one room Anna quietly read her prayers, while next door Whistler painted nudes and pursued his own creative ambitions.

During this period his fascination with realism had begun to fade, now, in his early thirties, Whistler was searching for a style that was unmistakably his own. For almost three years he withdrew into the studio, studying the Old Masters and experimenting relentlessly with new techniques.

Then, quite by chance in 1871, his model failed to arrive for a sitting.

Whistler asked his sixty-seven-year-old mother to take her place.

She was initially posed standing, but was unable to hold the position for long, so she was seated within the studio. From this unexpected change of circumstances came one of the most recognisable portraits in the history of art.

This central room of the exhibition presents Whistler at the height of his powers. In Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1, more commonly known as Whistler’s Mother, you can see his remarkable sense of geometry, the solemnity of his palette and the emotional weight he could achieve through a restrained composition.

Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1, 1871
James McNeill Whistler

Anna sits in profile against the restrained interior of Whistler’s studio. The simple wall, Japanese matting and framed print create an arrangement of carefully balanced shapes that felt remarkably modern for Victorian Britain, almost minimalist in its simplicity.

Detail of Whistler’s mother, with the etching in the background. Look at the value shapes. See how similar it is to Black Wharf etching

I have always loved Whistler’s drawings. They have a beautiful sense of tone and an elegant, fluid quality to the line. That same freedom can be seen in his paintings, particularly in the marks made with those long brushes.

While studying in Paris, Whistler had absorbed two lasting lessons from his teacher, the Swiss painter Charles Gleyre: black formed the foundation of tonal painting, and every colour should be carefully mixed before the brush touched the canvas.

Working on a grey-primed canvas, Whistler first established the drawing before beginning to paint.

He then mixed what he called his “sauce”, a fluid medium of linseed oil, turpentine and copal varnish that allowed him to build delicate layers of transparent paint.

One sitter described watching Whistler work with extraordinary speed and intensity during long sittings. His long brushes allowed him to stand well back from both the canvas and the sitter, enabling him to judge the overall composition while painting. It is a technique very similar to sight-size.

Anna’s portrait was completed in only four weeks, unusually fast for Whistler, whose other portraits could take many months or even years. Anna wrote that she passed the long sittings quietly, often praying as she posed. That quiet dignity seems to permeate the finished painting.

Whistler himself was delighted. He had achieved exactly what he wanted: a composition stripped back to its essentials, with nothing distracting from the sitter’s presence.

Whistler’s Mother was never intended simply as a portrait but as an Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1.

Confident that it would be accepted for the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition of 1872, he was shocked when the selection committee strongly objected to the painting, the stark simplicity did not fit their expectations.

Despite its difficult reception among critics, the public responded very differently, reproductions sold in huge numbers and the portrait came to symbolise domestic virtue, motherhood and quiet dignity. 

Four years later, Anna left London for the healthier climate of Hastings, allowing Whistler to resume something closer to his former lifestyle.

Harmony in Grey and Green, Miss Cicely Alexander, 1872- 1874
James McNeill Whistler

The room also contains a striking full-length portrait of a standing girl. It is a wonderful painting in its own right, but it is also particularly useful for studying Whistler’s recurring visual motifs.

You can begin to spot his butterfly signature, which appears in different forms across his paintings and decorative work. The portrait also demonstrates his confident handling of greys. Although the palette is highly muted, the figure still feels alive and present.

Whistler vs Ruskin

In 1877, Whistler exhibited his painting Nocturne in Black and Gold: The Falling Rocket at London’s Grosvenor Gallery. 

Nocturne in Black and Gold, The Falling Rocket,1875
James McNeill Whistler

The painting was radical, nearly abstract depiction of a fireworks display over Cremorne Gardens.

Ruskin, a revered art critic and advocate for realism and moral structure in art, was deeply offended by its lack of traditional detail. 

Writing in his monthly publication Fors Clavigera, Ruskin criticised Whistler, famously stating that he “never expected to hear a coxcomb ask two hundred guineas for flinging a pot of paint in the public’s face“.

Whistler sued for libel to defend his reputation; the cross-examination in late 1878 became a legendary debate over the definition and value of art

When asked if he charged 200 guineas for a few days’ work, Whistler famously replied,

“No, I ask it for the knowledge of a lifetime.”

The jury ruled in Whistler’s favour but awarded him the lowest possible denomination: one farthing (a quarter of a penny) in token damages. 

The judge did not award court costs to Whistler, and the astronomical legal expenses ultimately forced him into bankruptcy by 1879. Despite the financial ruin, the trial is widely viewed by art historians as a landmark moment that helped pave the way for modern, abstract art by separating artistic merit from mere physical labour.

This is the first booklet Whistler published to defend his ideas, a wider war between artists and critics.

Later Years

Little Venice (The Little Venice), 1879 -1880
James McNeill Whistler

Fish Shop, Venice, 1879 -1880
James McNeill Whistler

After the sensational trial against John Ruskin, Whistler, now 45 and bankrupt, had to give up his home and studio in London.

The Fine Art Society, London, commissioned Whistler to complete a Series of Twelve Etchings of Venice (the ‘First Venice Set’), and this period provided a much-needed restorative and transformational period, enabling Whistler to re-establish his reputation and creativity.

Returning to etching and working with pastels on brown paper, he captured what he described as “Venice in Venice” He created atmospheric effects, detailing the back lanes of the city, gloomy passageways and doorways occupied by ordinary working people.

Whistler arrived in Venice in September 1879 on an intended three-month trip but, enchanted with the city, returned 14 months later with over 200 drawings and etchings. (I can see why, Venice is such an amazingly sketchable place – Sketching the Light and landscape in Venice)

For the rest of his life, Whistler travelled through Europe, painting small landscapes and constantly exploring new effects in oils, watercolours, and etchings.

The exhibition runs at Tate Britain until 27 September 2026. Not only can you immerse yourself in dreamy atmospheric paintings that prioritise mood, light, deep blues, silvers, greys, and muted greens, but also appreciate how James McNeill Whistler radically shifted how people define, value, and create art.

Further Notes on Whistler’s Mother

Shortly after his return to London, in 1880, his mother, Anna, died, and up until this point Whistler had refused to sell the portrait of her.

Later, when his portrait of Thomas Carlyle was purchased by the Glasgow Corporation for one thousand guineas, Whistler turned his attention to securing an even greater honour for his mother’s portrait.

Together with his friend, the poet Stéphane Mallarmé, he devised a plan to sell the painting to the French government.

By October 1891, Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1 had been delivered to Paris.

Although the government negotiated the price down from Whistler’s original asking price, the artist was delighted. More important than the money was the knowledge that the painting would enter the Musée du Luxembourg, the national museum for living artists, and eventually the Louvre.

For Whistler, it represented the ultimate vindication, a direct rebuke to the institutions that had once rejected his work.

When he later discovered the painting displayed in an obscure room alongside a relatively unknown artist, he wrote humorously to the museum director:

“If this goes on, I’m afraid I shall have to take my mummy away from your hotel.”

In 1932 the painting returned to America for a major exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in New York.

More than fifty thousand visitors saw it within the first two weeks, before it toured across the United States. By then, Whistler’s Mother had become one of the most recognisable paintings in the world and perhaps the most famous American work of art ever created.

The underpainting is fresh, just tone and shadow.

A faint suggestion of something emerging.

And in that moment, before any colour hits the canvas, the painting is perfect.

Not because it’s complete but because it’s got potential.

Nothing has gone wrong. There are no mistakes to fix. The best work you’ve ever made might be a few brushstrokes away.

Then you start to add the first touches of colour.

It’s genuinely exciting; you’re making decisions. Things are beginning to take shape, and as the painting progresses, you’re feeling confident.

And then, somewhere in the middle, it happens.

The ugly stage arrives.

A Series of Stages

A painting is not created all at once. It develops through a series of stages, and almost every stage temporarily sacrifices one quality, in order to build another.

You lose simplicity to gain structure.

You lose freshness to gain form.

But this stage, this stage feels like everything has hit you at once.

Last week I received an email from Samantha, who has been following the Market Day Peaches Still Life Course with her children (Aged 9 and 13).

“During Lesson 2, my son was saying how ugly his work looked, but as we later sat on the couch and looked at his painting… it looked so good! Haha.”

I love this so much. Not just because it’s a lovely image, the three of them on the sofa, looking at the painting with fresh eyes, but because it captures something I genuinely believe is one of the most important things to understand about making art.

The Obstacle is the Way

There’s a coding school in Paris called 42, founded by French entrepreneur Xavier Niel.

Applicants spend weeks working through problems they’ve never encountered before. They’re given challenges that leave them stuck. The school isn’t testing whether someone can code. It’s testing what happens when they hit a wall.

Do they keep going?

Do they break the problem into smaller pieces?

Do they ask for help?

Do they come back the next day and try again?

If a student gets stuck, they’ll often seek out someone who struggled with the exact same problem a week earlier. The solution isn’t always finding the answer immediately. It’s learning how to work through uncertainty.

What struck me when I first heard about this is how familiar it sounded. Because painting works exactly the same way.

Every painter encounters walls. A colour mixture that won’t work. A drawing that looks wrong. A painting that suddenly loses all sense of form halfway through. The difference is that when you’re painting alone, it’s easy to assume that getting stuck means you’re failing.

It doesn’t.

It means you’ve reached the next problem to solve.

This is one reason following a structured course can be so powerful. The path has already been laid out.

You know the painting has an ending because someone else has already walked the route before you. You know that the awkward middle stage eventually leads somewhere.

The challenge isn’t completing the entire painting in one leap. It’s identifying the next problem.

What often discourages painters isn’t the difficulty of the task itself. It’s imagining all the future problems they haven’t solved yet.

The ugly stage isn’t a sign you’ve taken a wrong turn.

It’s often proof that you’re exactly where you’re supposed to be.

And what happened to Sam’s children and their paintings?

They finished them.

Gessa – Age 9

Joseph – Age 13

With some encouragement and a reminder that the goal wasn’t perfection, it was the experience of working through the process.

“This project was one of our favourites this past school year.”

Paintings rarely reveal themselves all at once.

They unfold gradually, layer by layer, decision by decision.

Experienced painters have learned not to panic when the middle gets dark.

They recognise the ugly stage for what it is: not failure, but evidence that the painting is still in progress.

If you’re judging something that isn’t finished yet. It’s like reading half a novel and deciding whether the story was worth telling before you’ve reached the final chapter.

So keep going. Add the next brushstroke. Solve the next problem. Give the painting a chance.

Because until you’ve reached the end, you don’t know what you might create.

A student emailed me last week (hey, Vicki!) with a problem I think most painters face.

She was stuck in that difficult space between wanting to paint and overthinking every decision about what to actually paint.

That uncertainty can easily stop your enthusiasm to get back to the easel.

To break the cycle, she decided on a simple idea…

One of the fastest ways to improve as an artist is to get into the habit of checking your own work as you make it.

That might sound obvious, but it is one of the biggest differences between a beginner and a more experienced painter.

A beginner often keeps painting, hoping the piece will somehow come together. If anything, desperately picking up the pace when things start to go ‘out’.

A more experienced artist stops. Then checks, then adjusts.

That practice changes everything.

Progress in painting is not about learning new techniques. It is about learning to see. The more accurately you can judge your own work, the less dependent you are on guesswork or hoping for the best.

You start to spot small problems before they become big ones. You notice when a drawing is leaning, when a value is too light, when a shape is too wide.

And once you can see the problem, you can usually fix it.

That is why artists have always used simple checking tools to sharpen their eyes. Not because they lacked skill, but because they understood something important:

Your brain gets used to what it is looking at.

After staring at a painting for too long, mistakes can begin to disappear. The wonky ellipse looks normal. The portrait that is slightly ‘off’ starts to feel convincing. The unbalanced landscape composition seems ok, because you’ve looked at it for an hour.

A mirror breaks that familiarity.

It reflects the painting back to you in a way your brain has not yet memorised.

And suddenly, you can see it again.

It’s always a pleasure to visit a gallery that feels so naturally in tune with the kind of paintings you already enjoy, and Pallant House in Chichester feels exactly like that.

The gallery is situated within a Grade I-listed Queen Anne townhouse, with an impressive modern extension. It creates a comfortable mix of the period beauty of a townhouse, built in 1712 for Henry Lisbon Peckham and his wife, Elizabeth Albery, and the contemporary galleries of the new wing.

Morning class,

This week, I’ve been focusing on the simplicity of set-up and essential techniques.

Sometimes you want to get painting quickly, so I’ve propped a blank canvas or board behind my subject on the kitchen countertop, where the light was streaming in.

I used Oil Paper from a pad, just a handful of water-mixable oils, one water-mixable thinner for dilution, and a couple of brushes.

Eucalyptus Leaves

I was looking for the replacement leads for my mechanical pencil.

Just leads.

I knew I had put them somewhere sensible. Somewhere memorable. Somewhere safe. I just had no idea where that somewhere was.

I asked Vanessa.

“Have you seen my 0.5mm Uni leads? Little plastic case. White top?”

Vanessa has an almost supernatural ability to locate the things I misplace. She seems to carry an internal map of my chaos, but even she looked doubtful this time.

I checked the drawers. Lifted sketchbooks. Opened tins.

I briefly wondered whether they had migrated to the kitchen, victims of one of my “I’ll just put this here for a moment” decisions.

Nothing.

Amazon offered hope. £4.19 for 24. One click, and the problem would disappear.

But I didn’t want tomorrow’s leads. I wanted the ones I already owned.

A small stick of lost graphite was the moment it caught up with me. The moment I had to admit that my art materials storage “system” was not a system at all. It was more like a leaning tower of creative good intentions, a stack of brushes and a precariously balanced tear-off palette.

It’s hard to be creative when you can’t find a pencil.

One of the most common questions students ask me is: “How can I paint looser?” Many students want to know how to loosen up their painting, especially if they tend to get stuck in careful details.

But loose painting is rarely the starting point.

In my experience, what often looks loose on the surface is actually controlled simplification underneath. Learning to paint with control first makes a far stronger  ‘loose’ painting later on.

Messy and loose can look similar at a glance.

Structurally, they are completely different.

Loose painting is confident editing.
Messy painting is an undecided execution.

That difference in how they are constructed changes everything.

The hidden structure

If you look at painters like Sargent or Sorolla, their work, on the surface, feels fresh and spontaneous. The brushstrokes seem almost casual.

But slow it down.

The drawing is solid.
The values are clear.
The edges are intentional.

And also, let’s not forget the scale. When you’re first starting out and most probably painting small, 20 x 25cm, or in sketchbooks, you can flick through images online and think, ” Wow, how do those paintings look so luscious and painterly, yet still hold that accuracy?”

But the scale of the painting can really help.