Wasting time trying to get it "like everyone else" Art prints *and* texture in watercolour paper and about my painting style

 I have spent days, literally days, trying to figure out how to take the texture out of the scans of watercolour paintings.

I don't have artist quality watercolours, at this stage, so feel it inappropriate to sell  the originals until I do.

Most of my art is intuitive in the true sense of the word. It's hard to explain this to someone who has not experienced it. For example: yesterday morning I woke up needing to paint this shadow in a sauna, it was a certain angle and certain feel, and I felt like I was there, and I approach the canvas having no idea on what to do, so turn off my mind and just let the "feel" or intuition take over; There is no technical side to it as it's often done in little bits as I am guided to do, which often surprises me when finished.

I really enjoy this painting style, but I can't force it, I have to wait for it, which makes the intuitive paintings far less abundant and far more time consuming. They have something in them that I couldn't do if I tried; This is why I also like to practice and create through traditional painting methods, from visual reference, using my head, learning and growing outside of the almost automatic process of what I've been drawn to do, and while there is the mainstream "intuitive" style that many many count as such, where the heart helps with the mind and you draw with purpose of reference, yet still allow the paint to somewhat do it's own thing, it's still all practice and as I see it, trying to help the true intuitive art I do in some way.

This ever present tangent that I constantly do, takes me back to the materials I use. The intuitive art I feel drawn to do is not for me, and knowing that, I invest in artist quality paints, and I still need lot's more, I have been trying to build a collection of oils, so the watercolour paint goes on the back burner and with that, the quality and I thought I could still share via prints, where the inks had a much higher archival rating, however I have been using rough watercolour paper because I like texture in things, it adds dimension, however when I look to see what to do, most artists take that texture out in their scans.

It does show the texture more in the scan than in the original, however every method I have tried to remove it from adding two copies, one lighten, one darken and offsetting both, to scan one, turn, scan again, overlap at 50%, to even taking many photos in different light, on different setting and even different cameras and it seems to loose something the scans had, almost makes it look plastic.

As you can see above, it's much more highly textured than the original, however I think it still works. I thought it always worked but was focused on trying to "be like every one else". 

It's art, not a photo, and watercolour at that. It's not supposed to be all plastic and true to life, it's supposed to be an interpretive piece from a source of inspiration imbued with what *you see, not what the reference shows, so why is it so taboo to so many "artists" to show texture in their watercolour prints?

After wasting days and so much time that could have been spent on the many canvas that I have going right now, I'm leaving to "this is how it is, so should be" I personally still like it, infact I had it blown up to an A2 to see what it would look like blown up that large and the texture is off it's rocker in your face when up close, but on a wall in a frame, works. 

Like everything, perspective. Sometimes it takes just stepping back and evaluating for yourself, not getting lost in the noise of the crowd. (I typed crows here before correcting, what does that say about the crowd? 😉

So, from this somewhat early morning essay where I should have been doing Instagram post, I shall make another coffee and then list this print with the above photo to show the detail and let people know what to expect, it's a print from a watercolour, not plastic or a photo.

🎨🎨🎨