I've been thinking a lot about the differences between photography and painting. I remember David Hockney talking about how the fundamental difference was time: a painting was imbued with layers of time – the hours, days, and weeks over which it was created – with different thoughts, emotions and levels of exertion residing within each. A photograph, on the other hand, captured and preserved a micro-second within a single, thin chemical layer. Because of this, Hockney argued, a painting delivered more to a viewer. I've always used small watercolours, not photographs, to record my memories. Sometimes, I've used photographs as references or aides memoires for these paintings, but the paintings depict much that is isn't able to be captured on film – the sensual, sometimes surreal elements of experience that reside in the imagination, both during an experience and afterwards. By trying to paint them, they become more real to me than anything that can be absorbed onto celluloid (let alone a digital file).