As I worked this afternoon I remembered a question I have been asked recently that led to a rather long discussion on what is, and what isn't watercolour. There will always be a debate on this topic because the artists who only work in pure watercolour will favour the explanation regarding art that has been created by watercolour products alone. In that, if you paint only with a product that has the words "Watercolour" on it, it is indeed watercolour.
But as many exhibitions accept acrylics, collage and inks etc. as watercolour I can fully understand the confusion and why the question is continually raised. It certainly does seem that any medium that can be used with water is classed as "watercolour".
I would love to hear of an exhibition that only shows and accepts paintings that have been created with pure watercolour alone. And know that every artist in the show has worked with similar products, from the same starting point. So that you could genuinely see a watercolour collection without any addition of acrylics, inks or water based oils. It could be very interesting.
I must confess I love experimenting to bring life and light into my work. I avoid the use of other products because that , to me, is the excitement of working in this medium. The challenge. Seeing just how dark, bright or light I can go in each new piece. This afternoon I worked with dark shades, building up layers between hydrangea flowers in this piece and I like it. It has impact already and with a few further leaves added will be complete.