I have been painting watercolors almost exclusively of fish for the past 14 years. What started as an expression of my passion for fishing has evolved into a career and I am grateful to all of the art collectors, friends, and family who have helped make this happen. As I reflect on where my work is now and where it is going, it is clear that the act of painting fish is no longer just a tangential expression of my passion for something else, it is a passion in and of itself. The content of my paintings has generally moved from loose ethereal seascapes to precise scientific studies. The state of mind I must be in to create these is a kind of meditative escape (hence the name Escape Studio) and I am addicted to it. Oddly enough I have no shortage of creative inspiration—if life would allow, I feel as if I could paint all day everyday.

One might ask, what is the point of spending so much time making such detailed illustrations of fish—many others have and still do make illustrations like these (from Denton to Tomelleri)? I would argue that to an untrained eye, yes, my scientific illustrations could appear identical to any of the other illustrations of fish painted on a white background over the last two centuries. But to the trained eye my paintings are clearly unique from those of any other artist. They are unique from the pencil drawing core to the colors of my watercolor washes. Most importantly, they reveal my profound respect for the essence of these incredible creatures.

From my experience, avid fishermen and commercial fishermen are by far the most astute observers of the most subtle details in my paintings. I have learned a tremendous amount from speaking with fishermen and guides about my paintings, (particularly Cpt. Billy Silvia) and many of them truly see how unique and "true" these pieces are.

One might also question why anyone would spend hours and hours drawing scales with a pencil, when one could easily draw them in seconds with an Adobe Photoshop pattern-making tool? What about technology? Although photography often falls short of precise representation because of glare and distortion, between today’s scanners and Adobe Photoshop, technology can produce a more accurate scientific representation than I can with a paintbrush in exponentially less time. So what is the point? I would argue that because technology has taken over the (illustration) world, precise hand- made objects are all the more special, unique, rare. In other words, the illustration’s story, how it was made, has a huge effect on how it is viewed, understood. I am proud that my paintings are Photoshop- free. I think there is a kind of presence that my paintings have, although the realism is familiar, the knowledge that they are watercolors forces people to think about how they were made.