I see myself as a kind of anthropologist of the internet who is particularly interested in how it shapes crowd behaviour and social norms. My research materialises in the form of wonky representational paintings that occupy a middle zone between the imagined and the observed. My process begins with murky mental images that get fixed into loose and gooey paint. After years of making purely imagined paintings, boredom began to set in. The images started to feel too fanciful, too ungrounded. I wanted to anchor them, to nudge them toward the observed. I wanted to step back and view my imagination from multiple angles. So, I began exploring new ways of combining imagined imagery with reference material. I wanted to see what different kinds of references could offer to the painting process.

I think of painting as existing on a spectrum that spans between abstraction and photorealism. I’ll use this example of a stack of pancakes to illustrate my points.

The space between abstraction and realism is where I find the most possibilities. Not fully abstract, not fully real—just enough to defy gravity or logic, while still maintaining a recognisable, relatable sense of the world.

I see three main approaches to creating this kind of "in-between" imagery:
1.    You can imagine it.
2.    You can use and distort a visual reference.
3.    You can combine both of the above.

1. Imagined imagery
This sits closer to abstraction on the spectrum.

For years, I created characters in situations that felt like proto-narratives—such as in Princess Hair Middle Aged Gravity. The forms were simplified, the figures intentionally flat. Titles functioned like memes or single-panel cartoons, guiding the viewer through the image/text relationship. 

2. Distorted Reference
This approach lands in the middle of the abstraction–realism scale.

Some of the options for this would include doing an online image search, which wouldn’t give you much flexibility beyond what is already available. You can use AI- generated imagery, but here you’re limited by what the prompts can accomplish based on the training data set of the past. This method also outsources the imagination part, which is personally my favourite part of being an artist. You can take a photo of something that already exists in the world. Or you can build a traditional maquette, but for me these models would be too reliant on the laws of gravity.

3. Imagined + Visual Reference
This is the combination I find most exciting and one that gives me the widest range of possibilities.

I start a painting from imagination, focusing only on formal qualities like shape, line, and composition. Without external imagery, I’ve developed a responsive feedback loop between myself, the painting, and my imagination.

At a certain point, though, I get stuck. That’s when I bring in a 3D modelling and animation program called Maya. It’s important to note: I don’t begin with the model – I only use it after the painting has reached an impasse. Starting with a model would bore me; it would push the image too far toward realism and leave little room for improvisation.

Instead, I recreate the unresolved painting in Maya – complete with its odd perspective and gravity-defying elements. I then manipulate the 3D scene: changing lighting, testing camera angles, playing with materials. These explorations help me reimagine shadows, refine compositions, and add dimensional cues that ground the final image in a version of reality.

This back-and-forth process allows me to control:

Gravity
Light and shadow
Camera angles
Materials

Gravity
I can break its rules without the limitations of physical maquettes.

Light and Shadow
I can reposition light sources to affect mood and depth.

Camera Angle
I can test viewpoints and zooms to shift the composition.

Materials
I can visualise how different surfaces—like gold or frosted glass—would behave in terms of light and reflection.

In practice

For my recent exhibition, Dude, at Chalk Horse in 2023 in Sydney. I invented a character who was into micro trends and niche subcultures he learned about on the internet. But he often takes things too far. In the painting below, Coffee Extremist, this character became enamoured with high-end coffee gear.

In the initial paint sketch for Coffee Extremist I wanted to make a very flattened space with tubes and pressure gauges and something kind of like a science experiment for how to make the best cup of coffee. This is what I imagined:

I then created a 3D model based on that sketch.

This is the finished painting which combines the imagined and the observed imagination from the 3D model. I added in some reflections and shadows to ground this weird painting with a touch of reality.

Taken together I see these three stages like this: The imagination, the observable flexible reference and the result is the combination of the two.

A final example is Wall of Mirrors from my 2024 exhibition Retro Enchantment (Sophie Gannon Gallery / Melbourne Art Fair). I imagined as post-apocalyptic world where the internet no longer exists and people return to doing pre-internet things to entertain themselves. This painting depicts a bunch of kids in the woods who have just found a wall of mirrors, and it is as if they each have their own little screens, but it’s really just them delighting in their own reflections.

Lighting and reflection were especially challenging to visualise from imagination alone. My initial sketch was driven more by compositional needs than by optical realism. So, I used a 3D model to experiment with how the reflections might actually behave. In the end, I changed a lot from the model—but it served as a vital point of departure.

In Summary
Artists have been constructing maquettes as reference tools for their paintings for centuries. This approach in my own work felt too reliant on the laws of gravity. In order to create reference models for the impossible spaces in my mind, I began reconstructing my paintings in the 3D software program Maya. I developed a rapid, back-and-forth process that suits the speed of my painting process and imagination. I commence a painting from imagination, then build a 3D computer model in which I can move a light source around to decide how to shape the shadows. The shadows observed from the model are introduced into the painting, and I make numerous adjustments to both the model and the painting in an iterative process that continues until the work is finished. As technical and fussy as this process is, it has allowed me the greatest freedom in my work to date. Technology augments the imagination, generating a productive tension with the analogue process of painting.