There was a time when knowledge itself was the advantage.

If you knew more than everyone else, you were valuable. The people who had read the most books, mastered the most techniques or accumulated the most information became the experts in the room.

Then the internet arrived.

Now AI.

Knowledge has become abundant.

Answers are instantaneous.

It’s tempting to look at that and conclude that expertise has become less valuable.

I think the opposite has happened.

I think we’ve simply misunderstood what expertise really is.

Because expertise was never just knowing the answer.

It was knowing which answer mattered.

What to ignore.

When to follow the rules.

And when to break them.

Knowledge has become abundant.

Answers have become cheap.

Which means the value hasn’t disappeared.

It’s simply moved.

Away from accumulating knowledge.

Towards applying it.

Towards judgement.

Towards recognising what deserves your attention in the first place.

As a makeup artist, nobody has ever hired me because I know the ingredients in a foundation.

They hire me because I know when foundation is the wrong answer.

Because I can walk into a room, look at a face, the light, the clothes, the photographer and the brief, then make hundreds of tiny decisions that are almost impossible to explain individually.

That’s expertise.

Not information.

Judgement.

And I have a feeling that’s becoming true of almost every creative profession.

I’ve also found myself thinking a lot about scale.

Everything in modern work seems to encourage us towards it.

Scale your audience, your content, your business, your systems.

Scale yourself.

But the older I get, the more suspicious I become of the assumption that bigger automatically means better.

Because so many of the things I’ve built a career on simply refuse to scale.

Taste doesn’t.

Trust doesn’t.

Reputation doesn’t.

Neither does spending an extra five minutes perfecting somebody’s skin before they step in front of a camera.

Or sitting quietly with an idea until it becomes something worth saying.

Or understanding a client so well that you know what they’re asking for before they’ve quite found the words.

None of that is efficient.

Most of it wouldn’t survive a productivity audit.

Yet it’s exactly those moments that people remember.

It’s exactly those moments that become your career.

We spend so much time asking how something can grow.

I wonder if we should spend more time asking what must never become faster.

Writing this newsletter has made me realise something else.

Most of us think we’re building careers.

I’m no longer convinced that’s what’s happening.

I think careers are the by-product. Judgement is what you're actually building. Training both our eyes and our minds.

When I look back over my own career, almost nothing has happened in the order I expected.

Makeup led to fashion.

Fashion led to business.

Business led to writing.

Writing has changed the way I communicate.

Communication has changed the way I lead people.

Leading people has changed the way I think about beauty.

None of those chapters felt connected while I was living them.

Only afterwards do they begin to form a pattern.

It’s tempting to believe that successful careers belong to people who had a perfect plan.

I rarely find that’s true.

The careers I admire most look more like curiosity than certainty.

People following something they couldn’t yet justify.

Collecting skills they couldn’t yet explain.

Paying attention to interests that, at the time, appeared completely unrelated.

Eventually those seemingly disconnected experiences become the thing nobody else can replicate.

Not because each individual skill is unique.

Because the combination is.

Perhaps that’s what I’ve really been exploring through Beyond the Brush this season.

The relationship between attention and judgement.

The quiet ways we become ourselves through the things we repeatedly choose to notice.

I’ve spent the last year and a half writing about beauty, uncertainty, imagination, negotiation, resistance, taste, business and careers.

On paper they don’t appear to belong together.

To me they’ve always felt like different doors into the same house.

The world is changing.

Creative work is changing.

Technology is changing.

But I don’t think the response is to become faster than the machine.

Or louder than the algorithm.

Or more productive than everyone around us.

I think the opportunity is almost the opposite.

To become someone with better judgement.

To cultivate taste.

To care deeply about craft.

To build trust slowly.

To remain curious.

To become the sort of person who notices what other people overlook.

Because those things don’t scale.

And maybe that’s precisely why they’ll become more valuable.

I don’t know exactly where Beyond the Brush goes next.

That’s part of the fun.

The best work rarely announces itself before it arrives.

It tends to emerge after you’ve spent enough time paying attention.

For now, thank you for reading.

Thank you for thinking alongside me.

I’ll see you on the other side of summer.

Leave a comment

Something bestowed by the gods upon a lucky few.

As though some people simply arrived in the world knowing what was beautiful, while the rest of us spent our lives trying to catch up.

Then I became a makeup artist and, through that long journey, I realised taste could be trained.

I didn’t understand that straight away. If anything, I was completely overwhelmed. I was trying to absorb everything I could: technique, products, lighting, colour, skin. Meanwhile, there were people around me whose work felt instinctively... right.

I couldn’t always explain why.

I just knew they were seeing something I wasn’t.

Looking back, I think that’s what people with great taste actually have.

They notice things the rest of us don’t.

They find beauty where everyone else finds ordinary. They become fascinated by details that most people walk straight past. Sometimes their ideas even feel slightly wrong at first. But they’re wrong in a way that somehow opens up an entirely new way of seeing.

Those are the people whose opinion I instinctively trust.

Those are also the people I love watching work.

I could happily stand in silence watching someone whose eye I deeply admire put together a look. That is not to say I am trying to copy them, but more so because I’m trying to understand what they’re noticing that I’m not.

I remember watching The September Issue years ago and noticing how often Grace Coddington was simply looking out of the window as she travelled from show to show. I realised immediately that was part of the work and her work. She wasn’t wasting time. She was informing her eye with the world passing by.

Because if your job is to develop taste, then looking isn’t procrastination.

It’s part of the job.

It made me wonder how much of our taste is quietly being shaped by what we spend our days looking at.

We’re almost forced to watch endless iterations of the same subjects we may only have had a passing interest in to begin with. The algorithm keeps feeding us more of what it already knows we’ll engage with, until our world starts to feel much smaller than it really is.

Which feels like such a shame, because the internet itself is vast. It’s weird. It’s full of obscure corners and strange rabbit holes and brilliant people you’d never have gone looking for.

The algorithm isn’t interested in any of that.

And I do wonder whether only consuming the world digitally could ever really shape taste in the same way.

Seeing a painting on your phone isn’t the same as standing in front of it in a gallery.

It’s almost a sedated version of inspiration.

It gives you just enough to feel like you’ve experienced something, but never enough to really let it change you.

And I wonder if that’s why so much of the conversation around beauty has become so narrow. We end up talking about trends and so rarely of taste. About aesthetics instead of observation.

Maybe that’s why I struggle to answer questions like, “What do you think of the clean girl aesthetic?”

My honest reaction is usually... nothing.

Not because there’s anything inherently wrong with it, but because it has almost nothing to do with what I’m trying to do.

I’m not interested in recreating an aesthetic that’s already been named, packaged and endlessly repeated.

I’m interested in learning to see and showing a different perspective.

To me, those are two completely different pursuits.

One is about copying and pasting.

The other is about paying attention.I’m endlessly fascinated by formulas, texture and innovation but when I’m creating a look, products are almost the last thing I’m thinking about.

I’m thinking about character.

Mood.

Light.

Proportion.

References.

What I’m trying to make someone feel.

The products are simply the tools that help me get there.

And that’s not to say products don’t matter.

Of course they do.

Texture.

Finish.

Colour.

Formula.

Those choices can say just as much about your taste as the cut of a jacket or the furniture in a room.

But they only become meaningful once you’ve decided what you’re trying to say.

That’s the bit I’m always fascinated by.

Not just the technique.

The judgement behind it.Technique is tangible.

You can demonstrate it.

You can practise it.

You can measure whether someone is improving.

Judgement is different.

You can’t really download it from a tutorial.

It comes from looking.

Looking again.

Looking at things that have nothing to do with your own discipline.

It comes from continuely collecting references, experiences and observations until your eye starts making connections before your brain has had time to unpack why.

I think judgement is something you earn by paying attention.

And that’s when everything changes.

You stop seeing “nice makeup.” You start seeing temperature. Texture. Balance. Light. You notice when a texture feels too heavy.You notice when a colour is technically beautiful but somehow completely wrong. You notice when something has been overworked. You notice when someone should have stopped five minutes earlier.

I notice these things instinctively now.

But I also notice when I’m working with someone whose eye is better trained than mine.

That’s when I become very quiet.

I watch.

I ask questions.

I absorb.

Because I want to understand how they’re forming their visual information.

I was reminded of this only recently on a shoot.

I was trying to build a look and I just couldn’t get there.

I’d add something.

Take it away.

Put something else back.

Strip it all back again.

I’d convince myself it was finished, only to look at it thirty seconds later and know it wasn’t.

At one point I’d added so much that it almost revolted me.

Which turned out to be useful.

Because it forced me to question what I thought I liked.

I started removing things again.

Changing proportions.

Looking harder.

Asking different questions.

And eventually, there it was staring back at me.

All because I’d challenged my own judgement enough to recognise it when I finally saw it.

I think that’s a huge part of developing taste that we don’t really talk about.

It’s not just learning what you like.

It’s having the confidence to keep challenging your own idea of taste.

To keep refining it. To delve in to what you find repulsive and embrace it.

To let your eye evolve instead of protecting it.

The more I think about it, the more I realise taste has very little to do with buying.

It’s certainly not something you can purchase.

Owning beautiful things doesn’t automatically make someone observant any more than owning expensive paint makes someone an artist.

Some of the most stylish people I’ve ever met wear the most unexpected combinations imaginable. Price becoming almost irrelevant. Something inherited from a grandparent beside something they picked up in a high street shop and mixed with a designer item. Things that shouldn’t work together, but create magic.

Taste isn’t built in the shopping basket.

It’s built in the eye.

Money can buy access.

It can’t buy discernment.

I’ve been debating this idea with a friend recently because she believes taste is something much deeper. That it’s inherent to our nature. Part of our character. That you can study, observe and imitate, but there’s an instinct that simply can’t be borrowed.

The more I’ve sat with that conversation, the more I’ve realised I don’t actually think we’re disagreeing.

Yes, I think you can train your eye.

I think you can become more observant.

More discerning.

You can learn to notice things you would have walked straight past a year ago.

But what your eye keeps returning to...

That’s different.

That’s you.

That’s why two people can stand in front of the same painting, watch the same film, fall in love with the same designer and still go on to create completely different work.

They’re seeing the same thing.

They’re not noticing the same thing.

And I think that’s where taste lives.

Not in copying someone else’s point of view.

But in slowly uncovering your own.

Perhaps that’s why taste can never be copied.

Only revealed.

And I think that’s becoming harder than ever.

We’re surrounded by more imagery than any generation before us.

Not just more.

An endless stream of it.

So much that I sometimes wonder if it’s having the opposite effect.

Instead of sharpening our eye, it’s blunting it.

Instead of making us more observant, it’s making us skim.

We don’t linger anymore.

We don’t sit with an image.

We don’t ask ourselves why something feels beautiful.

We just keep scrolling.

Algorithms are incredibly good at showing us what has already been rewarded.

And it’s hard not to chase that.

Visibility matters.

Building a career matters.

We all have to participate in that game to some degree.

But I don’t think that’s where taste lives.

Taste lives slightly further off the path.

In the details everyone else walked past.

In the references that don’t quite belong together.

In the combinations that make people stop for a second because they haven’t quite seen them before.

I think that’s the challenge for every creative working today.

How do you build visibility without letting the algorithm become your taste?

How do you keep feeding your eye things that haven’t already been validated by everyone else?

How do you stay curious enough to notice something before the internet tells you it’s beautiful?

Because whatever you’re feeding your eye today will quietly become your instincts tomorrow.

And that’s true whether you’re a makeup artist, photographer, stylist, designer, filmmaker or writer.

One of the greatest gifts this career has given me isn’t knowing how to apply makeup.

It’s learning to pay attention.

To notice tiny differences.

To trust quiet instincts.

To become fascinated by why something feels beautiful rather than rushing to recreate it.

To notice a thread, or a button.

The way I feel when I am immersed in an exhibition,

The quality of afternoon light as I walk through a new town.

The colours in a puddle after it rains.

These days I’m far less interested in asking,

“What products did they use?”

I’m much more interested in asking,

“What do I find interesting and why?”

Because I don’t think taste is something we apply.

I think taste is a consequence of attention.

Your eye is always being trained.

The only question is...

Who’s training it?

Leave a comment

Take Jack and the Beanstalk.

As adults, we tend to remember it as a story about courage or luck. But I don’t think that’s what makes Jack interesting.

A giant beanstalk appears overnight, stretching impossibly into the clouds. Every sensible adult would ask who planted it, whether it’s structurally sound, or if somebody should report it to the local council.

Jack climbs it.

He doesn’t know what’s at the top.

He doesn’t know if it’s safe.

He doesn’t know if it’ll work out.

He’s simply curious enough to find out.

And I’ve found myself wondering whether that’s the quality we’re slowly losing.

Not bravery.

Curiosity

.

Because somewhere between childhood and adulthood, many of us stop climbing beanstalks. We become increasingly efficient, increasingly responsible, increasingly productive. We optimise our calendars, refine our workflows, answer emails more quickly, and learn to justify every hour of our day.

All of which is useful.

But I’ve started to wonder whether we’ve accidentally optimised away the very thing that made us creative in the first place.

Curiosity rarely arrives with a business case.

It almost always begins with a question that doesn’t yet have an answer.

One question has stayed with me all week. I heard it during the Schiaparelli Couture show:

What is your eye hungry to see when your eye is exhausted?

I haven’t been able to shake it.

Because I think our eyes are exhausted.

Psychologically.

We consume thousands of images every week. Endless campaigns. Endless mood boards. Endless opinions. Every algorithm has become extraordinarily good at showing us more of what we’ve already seen.

And somewhere in all of that, surprise quietly disappears.

We mistake saturation for inspiration.

They’re not the same thing.

The work that changes fashion, photography, design or culture rarely comes from looking at more of the same. It comes from noticing something that everybody else walked straight past.

That kind of noticing is becoming increasingly rare.

Partly because we’ve become obsessed with productivity.

I was reading recently about something neuroscientists call the Default Mode Network. It’s a wonderfully technical name for something beautifully ordinary. It’s the network in your brain that becomes active when you’re apparently doing nothing at all.

Walking.

Swimming.

Gardening.

Driving a familiar route.

Staring out of a train window.

Pottering around a bookshop with absolutely no intention of buying anything.

For years, we assumed these moments were unproductive because they didn’t look like work.

In reality, they’re often where the work begins.

The Default Mode Network is associated with imagination, memory, future thinking, and connecting seemingly unrelated ideas. It’s the reason so many people solve problems in the shower instead of at their desk.

Your brain isn’t switching off.

It’s connecting dots you didn’t know belonged together.

That struck me because I think we’ve developed a strange relationship with idleness.

Every spare moment gets filled.

Waiting for a coffee? Check your emails.

On the train? Catch up on messages.

Walking somewhere? Listen to a podcast.

Five minutes before a meeting? Open Instagram.

We’ve become incredibly uncomfortable with empty space.

Which is ironic because empty space is where so much creativity actually lives.

The Japanese have a beautiful concept called Ma. It’s often translated as “the space between things,” but that doesn’t quite capture it.

Ma isn’t empty.

It’s meaningful.

It’s the pause that makes music emotional.

The white space that makes a photograph breathe.

The silence in a conversation that allows somebody to say what they really mean.

Creative people instinctively understand this in their work.

We leave space around an image.

We understand negative space.

We know that editing is often more important than adding.

But we rarely apply the same principle to our own lives.

We’ve removed all the Ma.

Every gap gets filled.

Every pause gets occupied.

Every moment becomes content.

Perhaps creativity doesn’t need more stimulation.

Perhaps it needs more space.

Rick Rubin writes beautifully about this idea. One of the things I admire most about his work isn’t that he tells people how to become more creative. He talks instead about becoming more receptive.

I think that’s a subtle but profound distinction.

The question isn’t always, “How do I produce better ideas?”

Sometimes it’s, “Have I created a life in which good ideas can actually find me?”

Because ideas are strange things.

You can’t bully them into existence.

You can invite them.

You can make yourself available to them.

But you can’t schedule them for 2.30 on a Tuesday afternoon.

I’ve also been thinking about the psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and his work on flow. We often reduce flow to being “in the zone,” but I think his deeper point was that joy isn’t simply the reward for meaningful work.

It’s often found inside it.

Not afterwards.

During.

The moments when time disappears.

When your curiosity is leading instead of your ego.

When you’re exploring instead of performing.

Perhaps that’s why joy matters so much.

Not because it’s pleasant.

Because it’s informative.

Joy has a habit of pointing towards the things we’re naturally drawn to.

The things we notice before anybody asks us to.

The things we’d probably still be interested in even if nobody was paying us.

Which brings me to artificial intelligence.

One of the questions I’ve been asked most this year is whether I think AI will replace creative work.

I don’t.

At least, I don’t think that’s the most interesting question.

The question I’m interested in is whether AI can protect creativity.

I don’t want AI to have my imagination.

I want it to protect it.

If it can organise my inbox, summarise documents, schedule meetings, or deal with repetitive administrative tasks, brilliant.

Not because I want to check out or stop being involved in what I’m working on.

Because I’d rather spend that hour walking through a gallery, reading something unexpected, or following a completely unnecessary rabbit hole that may or may not become an idea—or a project I’m incredibly proud of—six months from now.

I don’t want AI climbing the beanstalk for me.

I want it clearing enough of the undergrowth that I still have the energy to climb it myself.

Maybe that’s the real luxury now.

We often think luxury is about objects.

Perhaps luxury has become uninterrupted attention.

An afternoon with no notifications.

A conversation that isn’t rushed.

An hour in a museum.

A notebook.

A walk.

The psychological space to become fascinated by something again.

Because if there’s one thing I’m becoming increasingly convinced of, it’s this.

The future won’t belong to the people who consume the most information.

It will belong to the people who can still notice what everybody else has stopped seeing.

The people who protect their curiosity.

Who leave enough space in their lives for ideas to arrive.

Who still allow themselves to wander without needing to justify why.

Maybe that’s what fairy tales were trying to teach us all along.

Not that giants exist.

Not even that magic exists.

But that every meaningful adventure begins the same way.

With somebody curious enough to start climbing before they know what’s waiting at the top.

Leave a comment

At the beginning of every year we approach life in a wonderfully optimistic state. We buy the notebook. We make the vision board. We decide this is the year we’ll finally launch the business, leave the job, charge what we’re worth, stop people-pleasing, post consistently or become the sort of person who mysteriously enjoys getting up at 5am.

January serves an important purpose.

It asks us to imagine a bigger life before we’ve got any evidence that it’s possible.

Almost none of it has been tested yet.

It’s pure imagination

.

It reminds me a little bit of a runway show. On the runway, everything is perfect. The silhouette, the styling, the lighting, the soundtrack. It’s the designer’s imagination presented exactly as they intended it.

Ready-to-wear is something else entirely.

The collection has met reality.

It has to survive production, budgets, customers, seasons, wearability and the fact that somebody needs to get dressed on a Tuesday morning.

The dream hasn’t disappeared.

It’s simply been edited by reality.

I think the first six months of the year do exactly the same thing.

By July, reality has entered the chat.

Some clients never materialised.

Others arrived completely out of the blue.

Projects you were convinced would change everything barely made a dent.

Work you nearly turned down became the best thing you’ve done all year.

Some ambitions have grown.

Others have quietly become irrelevant.

Some things you thought you wanted suddenly don’t seem worth the energy they require.

That’s why I don’t think the halfway point of the year is really about reviewing your goals.

Read more

Now I’m beginning to think the harder part is allowing reality to interrupt the stories we tell ourselves.

That sounds rather dramatic, but….I think a surprising number of creative people spend years protecting their potential.

I don’t imagine anyone would ever admit to doing it, of course. We tell ourselves we’re waiting for the right opportunity. Another season. Another year of experience. A stronger portfolio. Better timing. More money. The market to calm down. Fashion to sort itself out in general.

They’re all perfectly sensible reasons.

But I’ve started to wonder whether something else is going on underneath.

Perhaps we’re protecting the version of ourselves that only exists because it hasn’t yet been tested.

Potential is a funny thing.

It has no edges

.

As long as the work hasn’t been made, it can still be brilliant.

As long as the business hasn’t launched, it can still become hugely successful.

Potential is wonderfully generous because it asks nothing of us except belief.

Reality is far less accommodating.

The moment something exists, it starts producing evidence.

And I think that’s the bit we quietly underestimate.

People often say we’re frightened of failure.

I’m not convinced.

Failure is horrible, yes. But most of us recover from it eventually. We get another job. We make another piece of work. We lick our wounds, complain to our friends and carry on. If I’m honest, we probably deal with failure far more often than we deal with success in this line of work.

So I don’t think failure is what frightens us most.

I think what frightens us more is information.

Because once the work exists, it starts telling us things.

Sometimes they’re encouraging.

Sometimes they’re deeply inconvenient.

The idea you thought would change everything barely gets noticed.

The job you almost didn’t take changes your career.

The product you weren’t sure about becomes the thing people love most.

The point is that afterwards, you know something you didn’t know before.

The work answers back.

And once reality has answered, you can’t unknow what it told you.

I was reading about the idea of Resistance this week. Not resistance in the traditional sense you might be thinking of, but the idea that Resistance appears in front of meaningful work. Nobody procrastinates over emptying the dishwasher. Resistance shows up before writing the novel, starting the business or having the conversation you’ve been avoiding for months.

I think that is absolutely right.

But I also found myself wondering whether Resistance is really the thing we’re fighting.

Or whether Resistance is simply what it feels like when we’re standing on the edge of replacing imagination with evidence.

That feels different.

Interestingly, behavioural economists have been talking about something similar for years. It’s called loss aversion: the idea that we experience losses much more intensely than equivalent gains. It’s one of the reasons we’re often reluctant to change, even when change might make our lives better.

But I wonder whether creative careers have their own version of this.

Perhaps we’re not just protecting what we already have.

Perhaps we’re protecting who we imagine we might become.

There’s something strangely comforting about unlimited potential.

If you’ve never directed the campaign, you can still imagine you would have directed it brilliantly.

If you’ve never cleared that show, you can still explain exactly how you would have done it better.

If you’ve never launched the business, it can still be the company that changes your life.

The imagined version of ourselves is wonderfully difficult to argue with.

Reality, on the other hand, has big opinions.

Reality doesn’t really care what we imagined.

It only cares what survives contact with the world.

I’ve felt this repeatedly while building PROSHINE.

Before you manufacture a product, you think you’re building a sexy skincare company.

Reality gently informs you that you’re also building a logistics company, a cash flow company, a packaging company and, on certain days, what feels suspiciously like a legal practice.

None of those things featured in the dream let me tell you.

But every one of them taught me something.

Every retailer that said no.

Every customer and peer review.

It’s all evidence.

Some of it’s very encouraging.

Some of it is gut wrenching.

All of it’s useful.

I’ve started to wonder whether this concept is actually what separates the people who stay at the top of creative industries for decades.

They don't seem frightened to put their talent on trial. And not because they care less about being talented. I think it's actually the opposite. I think they care enormously, but...

They keep exposing it to reality.

Testing it.

Refining it.

Again and again.

When I think about somebody like Pat McGrath, I don’t think what makes her extraordinary is confidence.

I think it’s curiosity.

Twenty-five years into one of the greatest careers our industry has ever seen, she’s still testing ideas.

Still trying things.

Still allowing reality to answer.

That’s quite a remarkable way to spend a career.

After enough years, something starts to change.

You stop relying quite so much on belief because you’ve built something much more useful.

Evidence.

You’ve seen ideas fail.

You’ve seen others work far better than you expected.

You’ve been wrong often enough that your judgement becomes sharper.

You’ve been right often enough to know when your instincts can be trusted.

I don’t actually think confidence is the thing we’re looking at.

I think what we’re looking at is accumulated proof.

Perhaps that’s why the very best people often seem so calm.

From the outside it looks like confidence.

Maybe it isn’t.

Maybe it’s twenty or thirty years of repeatedly asking the same question.

Is this any good?

And then having the courage to listen to the answer.

I’ve realised that experience probably isn’t just the passing of time.

Plenty of people spend twenty years repeating the same year.

Experience is what happens when reality is allowed to educate you.

Untested talent is only potential.

Tested talent becomes expertise.

That sentence has been sitting with me all week.

I can’t seem to get it out of my head.

Because I think we spend an enormous amount of time talking about talent. Celebrating it. Searching for it. Wondering whether we have enough of it.

But talent is only where the story begins.

Evidence is what keeps it going.

The older I get, the less interested I am in protecting the idea of being good at something.

I’d much rather know.

Because once you know, you can improve.

You can adapt.

You can refine your judgement.

You stop performing confidence and start building competence.

Perhaps that’s what a long creative career really is.

Not a lifetime spent protecting your potential.

A lifetime spent testing it.

And I’m beginning to wonder whether confidence is simply what accumulated proof feels like.

Leave a comment

You learn by assisting. You learn by observing. You learn by making mistakes, by watching people better than you and slowly figuring out why their work feels different.

You learn colour, timing, proportion, products, lighting, references, technique and taste.

What you don’t spend much time learning is how to explain any of it.

That’s understandable. Most of us enter creative industries because we’re drawn to making things, not describing them. We spend years developing instinct, judgement and taste, yet very little time thinking about how we communicate those things to other people.

The irony is that the further you progress in your career, the more important that skill becomes.

Because knowing something and explaining something are not the same thing.

A lot of creative decisions happen before language arrives. Sometimes you’re following a gut feeling. Sometimes you’re chasing a mood or responding to something that simply feels right and only later do you understand why

.

That works perfectly well when you’re working alone.

Creative work, unfortunately, rarely happens alone.

At some point your thoughts have to leave your head and enter somebody else’s.

And that is where things become interesting.

I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve watched a room full of intelligent, experienced people all believe they were discussing the same thing only to discover hours later that they weren’t.

A creative director says they want something modern.

A client says they want something premium.

A photographer says they want something raw.

A makeup artist hears one thing.

The stylist hears another.

The producer hears something else entirely.

Everybody leaves the conversation feeling reassured.

Then everybody arrives on set carrying a slightly different version of reality.

Most creative conflict isn’t caused by bad intentions. It’s caused by people believing they understand each other when they don’t.

In fact, I’d go a step further.

I think a huge amount of stress inside creative industries has very little to do with talent and a lot to do with communication.

Bad briefs.

Vague language.

Assumptions.

People using the same words to describe completely different ideas.

I’ve been on shoots where somebody has been shown a reference and returned with something so wildly different that the entire team spends the next hour trying to work out how both people started from the same image.

Nobody is necessarily incompetent.

Somewhere between intention and execution, something got lost.

I don’t think this really dawned on me until I started teaching makeup in my early twenties.

Actually, if I’m honest, I probably learned more about communication through teaching and retail than I ever did through fashion.

Teaching forces you to unpack things that have become automatic.

Students may accept “because it looks right” as an answer but they don’t learn from it.

They want to know why so as they can truly understand and build a strong foundation to their knowledge. When this happens, you quickly realise how much of your expertise has become instinctive.

You know what to do.

Explaining why you’re doing it is an entirely different skill.

Around the same time, I attended a training seminar on listening while working in retail.

I remember sitting there feeling as though somebody had finally handed me a piece of the puzzle I didn’t know I was missing.

It wasn’t one of those moments where I wondered how this would apply to my career.

I knew immediately.

This was useful.

The central lesson was deceptively simple.

Listening isn’t passive.

Most people think listening means staying quiet until somebody else has finished speaking. Good listeners are doing something entirely different.

They’re listening to the words.

They’re listening to the assumptions underneath the words.

They’re listening to what’s missing.

They’re listening to contradictions.

They’re listening to uncertainty.

They’re listening to emotion.

Most importantly, they’re listening for the gap between what somebody says and what they mean. Because particularly in creative industries, people are often terrible at describing what they want.

Somebody shows you a reference and says:

“I love the energy.”

Fine.

What part of the energy?

The styling?, lighting?, casting?, attitude?

The colour palette?

The confidence?

The nostalgia?

Those are all completely different conversations.

The challenge is that people often don’t know the answer themselves.

They know how something makes them feel.

They haven’t necessarily worked out why.

And I think that’s where a lot of creatives get themselves into trouble.

We assume the job is execution.

Often the job is translation.

One of the most useful frameworks I’ve come across comes from former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss.

Read more

The ability to remain “in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason.”

It’s a beautiful phrase.

It’s also a deeply uncomfortable one.

Because most of us spend a huge amount of our lives doing the exact opposite (me more than anyone!)

.

We want answers.

We want certainty.

We want to know whether the job is coming in. Whether the client liked the work. Whether the project is succeeding. Whether we’re making the right decision. Whether we should stay or leave. Push harder or let go.

Creative careers are particularly brutal in this regard because so much of what matters happens behind closed doors.

Someone books you.

Someone doesn’t.

Someone recommends you.

Someone forgets to release you.

A project succeeds.

A project disappears.

And very often nobody explains why.

The uncertainty can be relentless.

Which is perhaps why so much modern advice focuses on reducing it.

Optimise this.

Track that.

Measure everything.

Build a five-year plan.

Create certainty wherever possible.

And of course some of that is useful.

But there comes a point where uncertainty isn’t a problem to solve.

It’s simply the condition in which creative work exists.

The more ambitious the thing you’re trying to build, the less likely there is to be a map.

Nobody can tell you exactly how to become the next makeup artist, photographer, stylist, designer or creative director you admire because none of those careers followed a predictable route.

The path only looks obvious in retrospect.

While you’re living it, it feels considerably messier.

What I’ve started noticing recently is that uncertainty rarely stays contained inside our heads.

It leaks.

It shows up elsewhere.

Most obviously in the way we communicate.

Because when people struggle to tolerate uncertainty internally, they often begin trying to eliminate it externally.

Sometimes through control.

Sometimes through defensiveness.

Sometimes through a kind of joyless professionalism that seems to be becoming increasingly common.

Read more

You start because something captured your imagination.

Maybe it was something in nature. A show. A campaign. A photograph. A piece of craftsmanship. Whatever it was, it made you dream. And those dreams w…

Read more

So if someone has trained discipline, preparation, calmness, structure, emotional regulation, pressure will sharpen them.

But if someone has rehearsed panic, avoidance, ego, over-explaining…

Read more

And it’s this:

A weakness is just a strength overused or misused.

The more I thought about this, the more true I think it is.

Because most people don’t implode from having no strengths at all. Usually it’s quite the opposite.

They push the thing they’re good at so far that eventually it…

Read more

However, if you enjoy Beyond the Brush:The Unfiltered truth behind a career in MUP, it would mean the world to me if you invited friends to subscribe and read with us. If you refer friends, you will receive benefits that give you special access to Beyond the Brush:The Unfiltered truth behind a career in MUP.

How to participate

1. Share Beyond the Brush:The Unfiltered truth behind a career in MUP. When you use the referral link below, or the “Share” button on any post, you'll get credit for any new subscribers. Simply send the link in a text, email, or share it on social media with friends.

Refer a friend

2. Earn benefits. When more friends use your referral link to subscribe (free or paid), you’ll receive special benefits.

• Get a 1 month comp for 3 referrals

• Get a 3 month comp for 6 referrals

• Get a 6 month comp for 12 referrals

Visit the leaderboard

To learn more, check out Substack’s FAQ.

Thank you for helping get the word out about Beyond the Brush:The Unfiltered truth behind a career in MUP!

“We are commercial artists being employed by people.”

I heard Sam McKnight say this on the Fat Mascara podcast. It was an interview off the back of a Business of Fashion article that had gone quite viral, and I think the reason it stayed with me so long is because it felt like it cut through a lot of the confusion in this industry very quickly.

Because I think we keep getting things confused.

Read more

Because if we’re honest, a lot of people in creative industries were raised on the idea that the work should speak for itself.

That if you were talented enough, disciplined enough, good enough, eventually someone important would notice. That excellence naturally rose to the top.

And sometimes it does.

But increasingly, it doesn’t. Or at least not in the clean, romantic way people pretend it does.

We’re now in a moment where visibility often creates perceived authority before authority itself has even fully formed. People build careers publicly while they’re still becoming the thing they’re selling. And meanwhile there are highly skilled people, people with decades of experience, sitting quietly in the background assuming the work alone will carry them through like it used to.

I think that disconnect is becoming impossible to ignore.

Especially in fashion and beauty, where the line between creative work, personality, media and marketing has basically dissolved.

You can now be:
— talented but invisible
— visible but underdeveloped
— commercially successful but creatively disconnected
— creatively brilliant but financially unstable

And some of the tension people feel right now comes from trying to reconcile those things.

There’s also something psychologically strange about it for creatives specifically, because most of us didn’t get into this to become content machines.

A lot of people came into creative industries because they liked observation. Taste. Atmosphere. Making things. Being part of something visually intelligent.

Not because they dreamed of filming themselves talking into a ring light five times a day.

But the industry changed while people were busy trying to perfect the work.

And now visibility isn’t really optional anymore if you want leverage.

That doesn’t mean becoming performative or fake. I actually think people are exhausted by that. But it does mean understanding that if nobody can see your thinking, your process, your taste, your point of view or your consistency, then people have very little to attach to beyond a few jobs here and there.

And unfortunately, memory in creative industries is short.

I also think a lot of creatives are deeply uncomfortable with visibility because we think showing too much somehow weakens our edge.

We worry about being copied. About giving away references. About letting people too far into how we think. Like if we reveal too much of the process, suddenly the magic disappears and everyone’s going to run off with our ideas.

But the reality is, most people are overwhelmed and distracted. Unless you stay somewhere near the forefront of their mind, they forget. Not maliciously. Just because everybody’s consuming thousands of things a day and moving at speed.

I’m more visible now than I’ve ever wanted to be, honestly. Left to my own devices, I’d probably disappear into the corner of my makeup room and make things in complete silence. But if nobody else is advocating for you, building momentum for you, reminding people you exist, then at some point you realise you have to participate in that conversation yourself.

And visibility doesn’t only mean performing online.

I think that’s where people get stuck. They assume visibility means becoming a full-time personality, filming everything you do, speaking into a camera constantly, building some hyper-polished version of yourself. But visibility can just mean staying in circulation.

Being at dinners. Sending references. Following up. Posting moodboards. Emailing people. Letting your taste be seen. Letting people understand how you think and what they’re actually getting when they hire you.

Because most people aren’t just hiring technical skill anymore. They’re hiring perspective. Energy. Taste. A point of view. Someone who feels like a safe pair of hands but also an independent thinker.

And the difficult part is that visibility only really works if it feels sustainable to you.

You can’t force yourself into somebody else’s formula for showing up. People spend so long overthinking how to present themselves that by the time they finally post something, they’ve attached enormous emotional weight to it. They think it’s going to land like a cultural event when in reality most people scroll past it in half a second.

That sounds bleak, but I actually think it’s freeing.

Because it means you can loosen your grip a bit.

The goal isn’t to engineer one perfect moment of visibility. It’s to keep the conversation going long enough that people begin to understand your taste, your mind, your creative language and where you fit culturally.

And I think that becomes even more complicated as an artist because creatively, most of us are not just one thing.

There’s often a difference between the work that pays your bills and the work you ache to make.

Commercially, I know exactly where I fit. Creatively, I still question it all the time. I still wonder whether I’m showing enough of my actual point of view to attract the kind of work I genuinely want to be making.

And maybe that’s part of the tension too.

Trying to communicate a creative identity that is constantly evolving while the internet keeps asking you to flatten yourself into one recognisable thing.

Which is why visibility isn’t really about perfection. It’s about continuity.

Keeping the conversation alive long enough for people to grow alongside you.

There’s also a strange arrogance creatives sometimes inherit around visibility. Like being seen too much somehow cheapens the work.

And I understand where that instinct comes from, because overexposure absolutely can dilute things if there’s no substance underneath it.

But invisibility has its own consequences too.

You can disappear incredibly quickly now.

Particularly as industries become younger, faster and more algorithmically driven. There are assistants building entire audiences before they’ve even reached seniority. Brands discovering artists through TikTok before agencies. Creative directors pulling references from creators who understand visual communication online better than some traditional industry figures do.

That doesn’t mean expertise is irrelevant now. Far from it.

In fact, I’d argue real expertise matters more than ever because the internet exposes shallow thinking eventually. People can maybe fake momentum for a while, but depth has a way of revealing itself over time. Especially when pressure increases.

But expertise without visibility has become a very fragile business model.

And visibility without expertise eventually becomes exhausting to maintain.

The people who seem to be building the most sustainable careers now understand both sides of that equation.

They’re developing skill and narrative at the same time.

They’re learning how to communicate value while still improving the work itself.

They understand that modern creative careers aren’t just built in rooms anymore. They’re built in public memory.

Which is uncomfortable for a lot of people because public memory requires repetition.

You often have to say the same thing more than once.
Show the work more than once.
Explain your perspective more than once.
Reintroduce yourself constantly.

And creatives hate that because most of us romanticise discovery.

We want to be found.
Chosen.
Recognised organically.

But most careers aren’t built through one magical moment of recognition. They’re built through sustained visibility over time.

Through enough touch points that people begin to associate you with something specific.

Taste.
Humour.
Reliability.
Opinion.
Energy.
Consistency.
Execution.

Whatever your thing actually is.

And I think that’s where some people get stuck right now.

Because they’re waiting to feel fully formed or to figure out the online structure before they allow themselves to be visible.

But careers rarely work in that order.

Most people become the thing publicly while they’re still figuring it out privately.

Which is horrifying, admittedly.

But probably more honest too.

A lot of creative people are still operating as though visibility is vanity, when increasingly it’s infrastructure.

And those are two very different things.

Leave a comment

I’ve been thinking about this a lot this week, because I think this is where a lot of things don’t quite land.

And it’s hard to spot from the outside, because it doesn’t look like nothing is happening. It looks like you’re thinking about it. Trying to understand it. Getting your head around what you want and how it might work.

But at the same time, we’re hearing so much about manifesting. About aligning with the universe. About mindset being the thing that shifts everything.

And I’m not saying that’s wrong. But it’s not the whole picture.

Because you can think and philosophise your career all day long, and at the end of that day, you’ve still done nothing to move it forward.

That gap between thinking and doing is where things stall.

And I get it. I’m in it as well.

No one wants to do the thing they don’t feel ready for, over and over again. No one wants to put themselves in a position where they might look off, or early, or not quite there yet.

But the distance between what you want and what you have isn’t luck, or timing, or some perfectly aligned version of you that you haven’t met yet.

It’s bravery.

Being willing to show up even when you feel like everyone’s watching, or laughing. Even when you hit send or post and immediately want to lie down and die.

That feeling is the point.

That’s the edge of it.

Because nothing really changes while you’re still getting ready.

It only starts to move once you’ve actually walked out the door and got on the bus

.

Visibility Is Not a Personality Trait

I think there’s a version of this conversation where visibility gets framed as a personality thing.

Like some people are just naturally visible, and some people aren’t.

Confident people. Loud people. Extroverts.

And if that’s not you, then you sit slightly outside of it.

But I don’t think that’s actually what’s going on.

Visibility looks much more like behaviour.

It’s the small, repeated decisions. Posting something. Sending something. Following up. Letting people see what you did, even if it felt minor.

And I think a lot of us understand that on some level, but still don’t do it consistently.

Not because we don’t get it.

But because of what comes with it.

Once something is out there, it’s out of your control. You don’t get to manage how it lands, or who sees it, or what comes back.

And sometimes what comes back is nothing.

Which is a strange thing to sit in.

Especially when you know the work is good.

I’ve noticed this as well with people who have been in the industry a long time. You’ll hear incredible stories, big jobs, moments that really mattered.

And they’re all valid.

But if those stories stay in conversation, they don’t travel very far.

So you end up in this slightly odd place where the work exists, but it’s not being seen in a way that builds anything new.

And then it starts to feel like things have gone quiet, or slowed down, or shifted.

When sometimes it’s just that nothing new has been put into circulation.

Action Is the Only Thing That Moves Anything

This is the part that feels almost too simple, but I keep coming back to it.

You can have great taste. You can have a clear idea of what you want to do. You can even have a plan.

But none of it moves without something actually happening.

And I don’t mean the kind of activity that feels productive but stays internal.

Research. Overthinking. Reworking something endlessly.

That all has its place, but it doesn’t change anything on its own.

The shift only really happens when something leaves your hands.

An email. A post. A pitch. A conversation you weren’t fully ready for.

That’s the moment where something can actually move.

Before that, it’s all just sitting with you.

You’re Not Invisible. You’re Inactive

This is the bit I find slightly uncomfortable to sit with, but it feels true more often than not.

It’s easy to feel like you’re not being seen, or that opportunities aren’t coming your way, or that you don’t quite know how to get in front of the right people.

And sometimes that is the case.

But sometimes it’s also just that not enough of what you’re doing is being shown in a way that can go further than the moment it happened in.

Because so much of what we do is moment-based.

A shoot. A show. A job. Then it’s over.

And if nothing comes out of that moment, it doesn’t really build anything beyond it.

It doesn’t accumulate.

And careers tend to be built on accumulation.

Not isolated moments that felt important at the time.

Frequency Over Perfection

I think this is where it can start to feel a bit relentless.

Because it’s not just about doing it once.

It’s about doing it repeatedly.

And the volume of that can feel higher than expected.

What feels consistent to you can be almost invisible to someone else.

Which makes perfection a bit of a trap.

Because if you’re waiting for something to feel fully resolved before you share it, you end up holding onto it for too long.

And while that’s happening, other people are just putting things out.

Not necessarily better. Just more visible.

And over time, that builds momentum.

But I also think this is where creatives hesitate, and rightly so.

Because it’s not about pumping things out for the sake of it.

It’s about finding more ways to express what’s already there.

More ways to show how you think.
More ways to let your work live beyond the moment it was created.

That’s a different kind of output.

And it’s one that actually respects the work.

The Real Reason Action Feels So Hard

I don’t think this is about laziness.

If anything, most people I know are overthinking it, not underdoing it.

It’s more about what action brings with it.

Once you act, you get feedback.

And that feedback is clear.

If something doesn’t land, you see it. If something gets ignored, you feel it.

And that can be confronting, because it gives you a much more accurate picture of where you actually are.

Which is useful, but not always comfortable.

So it makes sense that people stay in the earlier stages for longer.

Thinking. Adjusting. Getting it ready.

Because once it’s out, you don’t get to control the outcome in the same way.

Momentum Doesn’t Come From Thinking

It comes from doing something, multiple things really, seeing what happens, adjusting, and doing it again.

Over and over.

That’s it.

There isn’t really a cleaner version of it.

And I think when people look like they’ve figured something out, it’s often just that they stayed in that loop long enough for things to start working in their favour.

And somewhere in that, something shifts.

You build resilience.
You build more self-trust.
You build evidence.

And suddenly, being in action all the time doesn’t feel as uncomfortable as it once did.

If You Want to Be Booked, You Have to Be Seen

This part feels obvious, but I don’t think it’s always acted on.

It’s not about being visible occasionally, or when it suits, or when it feels good.

It’s about being present often enough that people don’t have to remember you, you’re just there.

In their feed. In their inbox. In their general awareness.

Because decisions get made quickly.

And they tend to be based on what’s in front of people at that moment, not what happened months ago.

So it becomes less about one big moment, and more about staying in circulation.

The Shift

I think where I’ve landed with this, at least for now, is this:

Less time asking whether something is ready.

More time asking whether you are happy with and happy it’s been seen.

Because a lot of the time, the work itself isn’t the issue.

It’s everything around it that hasn’t happened yet.

And that only really changes once you start making moves.

Leave a comment

You either sit on things too long or you rush them just to get them out of your hands. You send the email quickly because if you don’t, you’ll overthink it and talk yourself out of it. And then you justify it. You tell yourself it’s better to send it than overwork it, that good is enough. Sometimes that’s true.

But if that becomes your default, then that’s your standard.

I’ve been thinking a lot about action this week. Small actions, the repetitive things that don’t feel important enough to take seriously.

How you respond to people.
Whether you finish something properly.
Whether you follow through or leave things sitting there.

None of it looks significant on its own, but it builds very quickly into something consistent. That consistency is what people actually experience when they work with you.

This industry doesn’t really miss that. It also doesn’t forget it easily.

You’ll keep coming up against the same issues until you deal with them properly. Same frustrations, same questions, same sense that something isn’t quite moving. It’s easy to explain it away by pointing at say, someone else’s access or connections, and sometimes that’s part of it. But it doesn’t hold anything up long term.

If your standards aren’t there, it shows. Eventually.

That’s why this sentence keeps coming back to haunt me.

How you do one thing is how you do everything.

Not in a perfect way. I’m not talking about perfection. I’m talking about your process.

Do you actually finish things?
Or do you think, that’s fine?

Do you think ahead?
Or wait to be told?

Are you properly there?
Or just sort of… there enough?

Because people clock that, especially over time

.

Expertise gets misunderstood because people attach it to status.

It’s not that.

I believe it’s consistency in how you operate. It’s being clear when things aren’t straightforward and reliable when things speed up or get messy.

But all that and the skills. The skill still comes first.

For me, with makeup, the goal was always to be technically excellent. Not good, not “gets the job done,” but properly able to execute in even the worst type of scenarios. The kind of sharp that holds up under pressure, on bad days and in very difficult conditions.

That doesn’t maintain itself. It needs attention. It needs to be used, refined, kept up. Like anything else, it goes blunt if you leave it.

And then everything else sits on top of that.

Your decisions, your taste, how you read a situation, how you handle people, how you move through and within a job.

If the skill isn’t there, none of that lands properly.

If the skill is there but everything around it is inconsistent, it still doesn’t land properly.

That’s where people get stuck.

Where it goes wrong, and where people justify it, is in the accumulation.

How your actions compound. You can be slightly off without ever really clocking the weight of it. It’s not bad enough to force a correction, so it just continues.

You were late because of traffic.
You were slightly unprepared because the brief wasn’t clear.
You didn’t dig deeper because the language was vague and rushed.
You were a bit checked out because you had a lot going on.

All reasonable. All explainable.

None of it extreme enough for someone to pull you aside and call it out.

But it adds up.

The people booking you, hiring you, recommending you — they’re building a picture over time. Whether they realise it consciously or not, they’re tracking how you behave, how you work, and what the end result looks like.

And a lot of that feedback loop, you never see. Work goes back to boardrooms. Images get reviewed. Conversations happen that you’re not in the room for.

So how you show up, and how you maintain your standard will be seen even after you’ve long forgotten.

There are a lot of people who are good. Really good. But loose. And unless you’ve got someone holding everything together on your behalf — an agent who is immaculate at execution, on top of every detail, every follow-up, every piece of communication — that looseness starts to show. You leave gaps. You miss things. You make it harder for people to rely on you fully.

And that’s where it starts to cost you.

If you’re not following through properly, if you need to be chased, if you’re relying on your talent to carry everything, it will work for a while.

Until it doesn’t.

Because at a certain level, everyone is good.

So people start paying attention to everything else.

And then there’s the next level conversation. You might want bigger jobs, more responsibility and trust, better clients. But are you behaving like that level already?

If you want bigger jobs, are you treating smaller ones like they matter?
If you want to run bigger teams, have you built any systems that would actually support that?
If you want to be trusted, are you making it easy to trust you?

That’s the bit people skip.

And it’s easy to miss, because you can justify all of it.

You were busy. You thought your agent did it. You had a lot on.
It wasn’t that kind of job. It didn’t really matter.

But this industry doesn’t separate things like that.

They read the pattern.

Not the excuse.

And because the industry is small, that pattern travels.

The shift to excellence is actually quite boring.

It’s accountability. Systems. Discipline. All things most of us are not naturally inclined toward.

Think about this though, image you raise your baseline.You finish things properly.You close loops.You follow through without being asked.
You make it easier for people to work with you.

Consistently.

You also stop waiting for the “right” job to take yourself seriously. You start behaving like this is the job that counts.

Because it is.

The smaller jobs, the quieter moments, the things you think no one is paying attention to — that’s where your standard (and your self trust) gets built and that’s what people remember, and remember, people change jobs!

The same applies to your skill. You don’t dip in and out of it depending on what’s booked. You keep it sharp. So you’re not getting ready when the opportunity comes — you are ready.

You’re not realising in that moment that you’re out of practice and scrambling

Most people think they’re being judged on their best work. On the big, visible moments. And yes, on the surface, that’s what gets all the attention. But that’s not what builds an excellent career.

What actually gets assessed is much more consistent than that.

What you’re like to work with, repeatedly.
Whether you can hold a standard without being managed into it.
Whether you can represent something bigger than yourself and deliver on it.
Whether you can finish at a high level, again and again.
Whether you make things smoother or more complicated.

This isn’t about overhauling everything.

It’s much simpler than that.

People get so used to doing the job, dealing with the pressure of it, the unpredictability of it, everything that comes with it, that they stop looking at the one thing that actually moves them forward.

How they are on the tools, and how they operate outside of that skill.

If you strip everything else back, that’s the question.

How good are you, really, when it comes to the standard you hold yourself to?

And is it actually as high as you think it is.

Leave a comment

Not something I’d come across before, which is probably why it stuck. Then I had a conversation with a friend about their career — things picking up, shifting, getting more serious — and it kept circling back.

What it actually made me think about is the psychological shift you have to be ready for.

There’s an energy change that comes with moving up, and if you’re not prepared for it, it can throw you slightly. You also have to step more fully into what you already have — your instincts, your taste, your experience — and use them properly, without second-guessing every move.

Because when you get to the point you’ve been working towards — you book the job, land the promotion, step into the title — you’re operating in a different circle.

The responsibility and energy you need to bring is different.
What’s required of you, in terms of reading the room and meeting the moment, is different. The expectations haven’t suddenly become unclear — they were never spelled out in the first place. But the stakes are higher now.

That’s a given.

There’s more riding on the decisions you make, and those decisions are yours to make. There’s no delay on it. You feel it immediately. You turn around to ask your boss and realise you’re the boss.

It’s not a “now what” moment.

It’s more like, right — we move.

And we move cleanly.

There’s a psychology to this that people don’t talk about enough. You can spend years building momentum by trusting your instincts, pushing when things aren’t clear, figuring it out as you go. That’s how you get there.

But once you’re there, it’s very easy to start interfering with that.

You may hesitate where you didn’t before. You soften decisions that were previously clear. You take a second to check yourself when you didn’t used to.

And then there’s the surface-level version of this, which I always find slightly ridiculous. People step into bigger spaces and suddenly think they need to look the part in a very obvious way. Designer bags, Cartier everything, a kind of performance of “I’m on this level now.”

As if that’s what’s doing the work.

It’s not.

No one serious is looking at that.

They’re looking at how you think, how you decide, how you handle pressure, how you carry the job.

—

You also see it in behaviour.

When people feel like they’ve outgrown a certain level, they can bring a lot of certainty into those spaces. Then they move up again, and they’re the one in the room with people who are more experienced, more established, more practiced. And that requires something else.

Presence.

Because at that level, no one is guiding you through it. No one is confirming every decision, mapping out your next move. At a certain point, you are the authority in the room.

Whether you feel like it or not.

—

That instinct shows up everywhere, but you really feel it in creative industries.

Because there isn’t a clean ladder. There never was. There isn’t one agreed version of success, even if there are big markers — magazines, campaigns, certain clients — that give the illusion of one.

And within those spaces, the structure is strange.

You can be the head of your department, fully responsible for your work, your team, your decisions — and at the same time, you’re still answering to multiple people. Clients, brands, photographers, directors. There’s always someone above you in one sense, even when you’re leading in another.

So you get used to that dynamic.

You get used to checking in, reporting back, adjusting.

And it can make it harder to recognise when you’re meant to step out of that and lead something fully on your own terms.

—

Because a lot of the time, you only brush up against that responsibility at first.

It’s not until the other opportunities start opening up — consultancies, brand work, ambassadorships, expert-led content, different revenue streams — that you’re properly in it.

That’s where the real shift happens.

You have to be crystal clear on what you’re doing and why you’re doing it.

—

You can be doing all of that, moving forward in a very real way, and still catch yourself questioning it. Not because it isn’t working, but because every new level asks something different of you, and you’re still calibrating. You start wondering if it’s right, if there’s something you haven’t seen yet, if there’s a better way you should be doing it.

And underneath all of that, there’s still that quiet pull towards someone else confirming it for you.

That instinct doesn’t disappear just because you’ve progressed.

—

The shift is learning not to follow it every time it shows up.

To stop looking around for a higher authority who’s going to confirm it for you.

And to get comfortable being the one who decides.

Because at a certain point, that’s the job.

You’re not waiting to be led anymore.

You are the one steering it.

—

There’s also a wider shift happening around all of this.

People like Sam McKnight are starting to push on things that have just been accepted for years — even something as basic as crediting. The way hair and makeup sit within the hierarchy of a shoot has always been slightly off. We’re integral to the outcome, we carry a huge amount of responsibility, but the recognition, rates and control don’t always match that.

That system made sense when everything was structured around a very traditional model — photographer-led, publication-led, very fixed in how value was assigned.

But that model is long dead.

Because now, the value isn’t just in the image. It’s in the expertise (if you allow people to see it) , the point of view, the ability to translate that into something that lives beyond the shoot — whether that’s brand work, consultancy, content, or influence.

So you’ve got a situation now where hair and makeup artists are no longer just a small part of the process. They’re building their own ecosystems around it. Which means you can end up in bigger rooms. Different conversations. Higher-level decisions.

And if you’re not clear on your own value in those spaces, you will feel it.

—

And this is where the difference between humility, gratitude, and understanding your own contribution actually matters. Because they’re not interchangeable.

Gratitude is recognising the opportunity. The job, the booking, the person who said yes. It keeps you grounded, it keeps you decent to work with, it keeps you aware that you’re not doing this in isolation.

Humility keeps you open. It keeps you learning. It stops you becoming rigid or overly impressed with yourself.

Both are necessary.

But neither of them should distort your understanding of what you actually bring.

Understanding your contribution is something else entirely.

It’s being clear on what you did. The decisions you made.
The standard you held. The way you carried the job start to finish.

It’s knowing the difference between being part of something and understanding the power you have when shaping it.

—

And this is where people start to misstep when things move.

Before you get the promotion, you’re told to act like it.

Take initiative. Step up. Think ahead. Be visible.

Then you get it, and suddenly you start managing yourself differently.

You become more cautious, more aware of how you might be perceived.
or you push forward too hard. It’s hard to know the balance when everything has a new weight and you have more to lose.

—

So you default to being grateful.

You try not to overstep.
You try to take up just enough space.
You try to prove you deserve to be there.

And in doing that, you flatten the very thing that got you there in the first place.

—

The job hasn’t changed in that way.

It doesn’t require you to become smaller.

It requires you to become more precise in who you already are.

Clearer in your thinking.
Faster in your decisions.
More comfortable standing behind them.

—

Which brings it back to something simple.

You get in life what you have the courage to ask for.

Not because asking guarantees anything.

But because most people don’t ask cleanly.

They imply. They hint. They wait to be noticed.

Instead of saying what they want, they hope it gets picked up along the way.

Sometimes it does.

A lot of the time, it doesn’t.

So when things shift, the work isn’t to hesitate.

It’s to meet it properly.

To think clearly.
To decide cleanly.
To hold your position without apologising for it.

Because if you’re in the room, you already met the requirement. Your job now, is to unapologetically enjoy it, be proud of yourself for it and own up to it.

Leave a comment

Partly off the back of a conversation with a friend — someone in the industry — and partly off the back of last week’s audit. And I’ve been thinking about it in a very specific way.

Not in the “know your worth” sense. That’s a different conversation entirely.

This is about value added.

Because if you sit in a room — really sit there and listen — it becomes quite obvious, quite quickly, who’s adding something of worth and who’s just… present and feeling the need to contribute.

And that’s not always a bad thing.

Some people are there to do a job, do it well, go home. No need to push it further than it needs to go. It’s efficient, it’s clean, it works. When you know your job inside out, there’s something quite satisfying about delivering like that.

But this isn’t about that version of work.

This is about the moment where something starts to feel ever so slightly off

.

If you’re not as excited as you used to be.
If the wins land a bit flat.
If there’s a low-level edge of frustration you can’t quite explain.

Nothing dramatic. Just… not quite right.

And the tricky part is, on paper, and in reality, everything still looks good.

You’re working.
You’re busy.
You’re trusted.
You’re liked.

Your agent’s happy. Your accountant’s happy. Everyone’s pleased with you, including yourself — technically.

But then you find yourself in a room, listening to a conversation, and thinking:

Is everyone hearing what I’m hearing?
Or worse: Really?

And that my friend is the red flag.

That small internal reaction is usually the first sign that something isn’t aligned anymore.

The instinct is to look outward.

The clients.
The opportunities.
The timing.
The rates.
The talent.
The publication.

It could be a hundred different things.

But more often than not, it isn’t any of those.

It’s just that you’ve outgrown the situation you’re in.

And that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with the room.

You might still enjoy it. You might still work well in it. It might still serve you — and you serve it.

But something has shifted.

You’ve moved on. Mentally. Creatively. Taste-wise.

You’re not being stretched.
You’re not being challenged.
Your skills aren’t being sharpened.
You’re not being used in the way you want to be used.

And that usually comes down to one thing:

You’re not adding value in the way you want to anymore.

There’s a very specific realisation that tends to sit underneath this.

You’re liked.
You’re trusted.
You’re solid.

But the job would happen the same way whether you were there or not.

And that’s not an insult — it’s just reality.

There are a lot of excellent people in this industry. We all know that. I can name a hundred peers who are brilliant.

So being good isn’t the differentiator.

Being liked isn’t the differentiator.

Being reliable isn’t even the differentiator.

Those things get you booked. They keep you working.

But careers don’t really move on that.

Movement — real movement — comes from being useful in a very specific way.

And I don’t think enough people ask themselves:

What do I add that nobody else adds?

And equally:

What am I willing to say or do that nobody else is?

Not in a performative way and not for attention.

In a real, observable, slightly uncomfortable way.

Because when you watch people move — properly move — especially within long-standing client relationships, it becomes very obvious what they add.

You see who gets trusted with more.
Who gets brought into bigger conversations.
Who gets positioned differently over time.

In traditional structures, that progression is mapped out for you.

In our world, it isn’t.

So you have to map it yourself.

Which is, frankly, why this Substack exists.

So strip it back.

What changes because you’re in the room?

Is the work better?
Is it faster?
Is it calmer?
Is it more precise?
Is it more interesting?
Is it more forward-thinking?

Do people rely on you for something specific?

Or do they just feel comfortable having you there — a safe pair of hands?

Because those are two very different positions.

And one moves. The other maintains.

The other layer to this — and this is where it gets slightly more complicated — is that the value you think you’re adding isn’t always the value people are actually experiencing.

You might think you’re being hired for one thing.

They might be hiring you for something else entirely.

And the uncomfortable question is:

Which one matters more?

The value you think you bring, or the value people actually feel?

And do they serve you in the same way?

Because if they don’t, there’s a misalignment.

And that won’t hold long-term.

There’s a lot of talk about personal branding at the moment. Everyone trying to articulate what their “thing” is.

But within reason, most of it lands the same.

Everyone’s hardworking.
Everyone’s passionate.
Everyone has a deep love for colour, texture, storytelling — we’ve all heard it.

And look, that’s great.

But that’s just the baseline.

That’s not the part that makes you stand out.

Because none of that actually answers the question people are really asking, whether they realise it or not:

What changes when you show up?

You know when someone walks into a room and they give a shit — properly give a shit?

The whole room feels it.

There’s a shift.

They’re paying attention. They’re engaged. They’re pushing something forward, even subtly.

And suddenly the standard lifts.

That’s value.

That’s someone influencing the direction of the work, whether they’re the most “senior” person in the room or not.

Because yes, there are power structures.

A photographer will always, on paper, hold more authority than a makeup artist or a hairstylist.

But influence and value aren’t always coming from the same place as hierarchy.

You can feel when someone is quietly steering something.

And equally, you can feel when they’re not.

If the room doesn’t need you, it won’t move you forward.
It’ll just keep you in it.

And if that’s what you want — stability, consistent work, good jobs, no unnecessary pressure — then honestly, that’s great. That’s a version of success. A very functional one. A very grown-up one, actually.

But the reality of this career is that most of us want both.

We want the stability and the progression.

And those two things don’t always live together. In fact, they often don’t.

I think it’s really important to sit with this properly:

If the room doesn’t need you, it won’t move you forward.

Because this is where people get caught without realising.

You can be fully booked.
You can be surrounded by good people.
You can be doing objectively good work.

And still feel like nothing is actually shifting.

Not because anything is wrong.

But because nothing about your presence is changing the direction of that room.

You’re part of it, you’re contributing, but you’re not moving it.

And that’s a very specific feeling when you clock it.

So if you’re sitting there feeling slightly underused, slightly out of sync, slightly irritated in a way you can’t fully explain — it’s worth asking why.

Because the gap between what you say you want and how you actually behave can be… quite something.

Sometimes subtle. Sometimes massive. Always telling.

Everyone says they want better jobs.

Better clients.
Better opportunities.

And people are very good at describing them as well. Very clear. Very specific.

But better comes with a whole different set of expectations that I don’t think we always factor in properly.

More visibility.
More pressure.
Less hiding.
Less waiting.
Less control over your time.
More exposure — in every sense of the word.

And a lot of creatives don’t actually want that part.

We say we do. We like the idea of it.

But when it comes down to it, we still behave in very safe, very familiar ways.

We don’t change how we show up.
We don’t push when it actually counts.
We don’t take up the space we claim we want.
We don’t go after things with any real persistence — not in a way that would actually separate us.

I have these conversations constantly.

People will tell me exactly what they want.

And then describe how they’re going after it in exactly the same way as everyone else.

Same energy.
Same effort.
Same visibility.

And it’s like… okay. So where’s the difference then?

Because that’s not adding value.

That’s just participating.

Yes — this is a good cut to make. The point is strong, it just needs a cleaner, less anecdotal way in.

Here’s a reworked version in your voice:

Even on a smaller level, you see it.

There’s still this idea that doing the job well, consistently, quietly, will naturally translate into opportunity.

And sometimes it does.

But more often now, if it can’t be seen, tracked, or understood beyond one conversation in one room, it doesn’t really exist in a wider sense.

That’s just the reality of how things move.

If you’re only adding value in a way that’s contained to a single moment, with a single person, and it doesn’t travel any further than that…

is that value?

Or is that just a moment that disappears as quickly as it happened?

And moments don’t build careers.

So there’s another question sitting underneath all of this.

Are you actually chasing something you want?

Or something you’ve just said enough times that it now sounds right?

If you stripped everything back — all of it — and asked yourself:

What do I actually want my future to look like?
What am I excited by now, not five years ago?

Would your answer hold up?

Or would it shift slightly?

Because I had that recently.

I was asked what I wanted, and I gave the answer I’ve been giving for years.

And then we actually talked it through.

And I realised — I don’t even want that.

I’d just gotten very used to saying it.

And I think that happens more than we admit.

We inherit versions of success.
We repeat them.
We build towards them.

And then at some point, you realise you’re not actually that interested.

For me, this Substack sits somewhere in that shift.

I didn’t start it because I wanted to be visible. If anything, I was quite committed to not being.

I was perfectly happy behind the scenes.

But it got to a point where staying quiet felt worse than speaking.

Because I could see what was happening.

The patterns.
The behaviour.
The gaps.
The strange logic of how this industry actually operates.

And saying nothing about it didn’t feel good anymore.

It felt like sitting on information.

So this week, the question is very simple.

What are you adding?

And be honest about it.

Because if the answer isn’t clear — or worse, if it’s “not much” in the way you actually care about — that’s not something to panic about.

It’s just information.

But it’s useful information.

Because it’s probably pointing you, quite directly, towards what needs to change next.

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

You disappear for a bit. Then you come back.

And while I’m not suggesting anyone heads off into the desert for 40 days, there is something in that idea that translates eerily well into creative work. Because whether you’ve had a brilliant run or a slightly grim one, there’s usually a point around now where things shift. Or where you need to catch them before they escalate.

So this is probably a good moment — before it’s too late — to actually stop and look at it properly.

Not just how did the last few months feel, but what do they actually say about how you’re operating?

If you’ve had a strong Q1, ask yourself the questions you’d normally avoid. Was that discipline? Was it visibility? Was it experience finally compounding? Or was it a lucky run that could disappear as quickly as it arrived?

And more importantly — what exactly did you do to make that happen?

Because if you can’t answer that, how can you repeat it?

And if you can’t repeat it, then you’re just riding waves and crossing your fingers they don’t drop you somewhere humiliating.

This is the bit people don’t love.

The audit.

Because it’s actually a really unsexy exercise.

I’m not talking about buying some beautiful journal with ribbons hanging off it and convincing yourself you’re about to change your life. I mean go to a shop, buy a basic copy book, and sit down with it properly.

Look at your work in unemotional terms.
Look at your behaviour as honestly as you can.
If you can’t be honest, ask someone you trust to do it for you.

Your output.
Your visibility.
Your relationships.

Call it for what it actually is.

Because one of the easiest traps in freelance careers is outsourcing accountability.

To your agent.
To timing.
To “the vibe.”
To the industry.
To the global economy.

All of it.

Agents are brilliant — they open doors, they negotiate, they protect you in rooms you’re not in. But they can also quietly become somewhere you park responsibility. Or somewhere you throw blame when things aren’t working.

It’s very easy to think, that’s their job.

And sometimes it is.

But not all of it. It couldn’t be.

So here’s a slightly brutal way to look at it.

Imagine you’re a product sitting on a shelf and the store is doing a clear out.

Where are you in the line-up?

Are you staying where you are because you’re performing, you’re relevant, you’re easy to sell?

Are you being moved forward because demand is building?

Or are you slowly drifting towards the discount bin while telling yourself it’s just a quiet patch?

And before anyone gets offended — this has nothing to do with your self-worth.

This is positioning.

Creative industries don’t run on how you feel about your work. They run on how easy you are to understand, to book, and to recommend.

That’s it.

Which brings us to the thing most creatives still slightly resist.

Your personal brand.

I know it’s a phrase that gets thrown around constantly, but if you strip the language away, it’s actually very simple.

What do people say about you when you’re not in the room?

And is it clear, consistent, and current?

Because your work speaks for you — and your work is everything. Your technical ability, your behaviour, your temperament, your level of commitment. All of it.

And like it or not, visibility is part of that now.

Social media isn’t going anywhere.

So if you’re not visible, that’s something to look at.
If you are visible, look at how you’re showing up.

Do you like it?
Does it represent you properly?

Word of mouth is brilliant, but it’s not the flex people think it is anymore — not unless it’s very, very loud. People still want something to look at. They want context. They want a sense of who you are before they book you.

So the question is:

How are you translating what you do into something people can actually see, understand, and remember?

And then there’s the uncomfortable one.

Who you align yourself with.

This one can quietly shape your entire career.

Because the people around you don’t just affect your day-to-day — they influence how you’re perceived, what jobs you get, what rooms you end up in, and what gets said about you after you leave.

You can be brilliant, but consistently attached to chaos — and it sticks. Chaos is sticky.

Or you can be steady, prepared, easy to trust — and that sticks too.

So part of this spring clean is asking:

Who am I working with?
What does that signal?
And is it actually helping me move forward?

If the last season’s been hard, this is where you shake it off.

Not in a dramatic way. Not in a reinvention.

In a practical, slightly ruthless way.

What’s not working?
What’s outdated?
What have you outgrown?
What have you been avoiding?
What have you been complaining about?

Because whatever you think about and talk about, you bring more of it into your world.

And if the last season’s been strong, don’t just celebrate it and move on.

Interrogate it.

There’s information in there most people ignore — patterns, behaviours, decisions that actually paid off.

That’s the difference between momentum and luck.

A lot of this comes back to something I think we forget.

We are the trade.

Without us, there’s nothing to sell.

But being the trade doesn’t automatically make you easy to book.

The packaging, the clarity, the positioning — that part’s on us.

Agent or no agent.

So consider this your Easter kick up the arse.

Take stock.
Clean it up.
Decide what stays.
Decide what goes.

And then go again — but this time knowing exactly what you’re doing and why.

Because the alternative is drifting.
It’s repeating the same patterns.
It’s slowly becoming the person who says, “it’s just a quiet everywhere right now”.

So… get the copy book.

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Which is interesting, because one of those is building your image—and the other is the reason you can afford to keep going.

If you have a tight hold on your career, you have an even spread of both.

Commercial work is where you learn how to actually do the job for real. You learn how to show up and deliver what’s needed. You learn how to keep things moving. You learn how to work with people in a way that makes them want you back. You figure out how to manage yourself, your kit, your time, your energy, your team.

You become useful

.

And you get paid properly for it. More than once. The kind of money that, if you’re sensible, gives you a bit of stability.For a lot of people, it’s also where things start to build. You can see progress. You can feel that you’re getting somewhere. It can move quite quickly when it’s working. Which isn’t always the case with editorial.So you become known as reliable. Efficient. Easy to work with.

All good things.

Until that’s the only way people see you.

Editorial is meant to be where you show your taste. Where you take risks. Where you actually put something of yourself into the work. It’s why most people get into this in the first place.Except it doesn’t always feel like that anymore. A lot of editorial now is quite controlled. There are more people to answer to. More expectations around what things should look like. Less room to move than there used to be.

If the stylist is restricted, everyone is.

So you end up in situations where doing something big with the makeup doesn’t make sense in the context of the shoot. Or you’re recreating what was already done on the show. Which is fine. It shows you can do it.

But it’s not yours.

And if it’s not yours, you have to question what you’re actually building.

Because yes, there is still incredible editorial out there. There are people doing amazing work. But it’s not the baseline anymore. It’s a smaller group getting that level of freedom.

It used to feel more open than that.

Now it’s tighter.

So if you’re putting your own time and money into something that looks very similar to what you’re already being booked for, it’s worth asking what the return actually is. Because if it’s not changing how people see you,if it’s not moving you closer to the work you actually want,then it’s not doing what you think it is.

It’s just keeping you visible.

And then there’s the contract.

The thing everyone says they want.

You get it, and suddenly everything looks great. You’re busy, you’re travelling, you’re earning properly. But it comes with conditions. There are things you can’t do. Things you don’t have time for. Things you have to prioritise whether you feel like it or not. So the freedom you had before shifts.

Again, not a bad thing. But it’s a different shape of career.

I know a lot of people who’ve stepped back from editorial. Not because they don’t care about it, quite the opposite. It stopped feeling worth it.

Too much time, too much money, not enough creative return.

So they question it. The answer is quieter than people expect.

If it’s too energy draining then stepping back is the right choice. If you continue down the path regardless of the outcome, well thats worth it when it comes to staying connected. Keeping relationships going. Being around enough that when something better comes up, you’re part of the conversation.

Most careers don’t sit in one place.

They move.

There are periods where you’re earning well, working constantly, everything looks good on paper, and you’re not that inspired by it.

And there are other periods where you’re doing work you actually care about, but you’re stretched because you’re putting more in than you’re getting back financially.

That’s normal.

What isn’t helpful is pretending it shouldn’t be happening. Because freelance doesn’t fix that for you. You have to manage it.

Which is where it gets practical.

If you’re in a phase where you’re earning, you need to treat it like it matters.Put money away.Be organised.Assume things will slow down at some point.Because when you decide to push into more creative work, the kind that could actually shift things, it costs you.

Time, money, energy. All of it.

So it needs to be worth it.

There’s also the moment where you realise something needs to change.Either you want to move out of what you’re doing, or you want to add something that’s missing. That’s where people start talking about transitioning.It sounds clean.It isn’t.It usually involves turning down work that’s easy and well paid.Taking a financial hit.Working with new people where nothing is guaranteed.You can move things around.But something usually has to give.

So what’s the job?

It’s not choosing one side and hoping it sorts everything out.

It’s knowing what each phase is for.

When you’re earning.

When you’re investing.

When you’re holding back.

When you’re avoiding making a decision.

And being honest about it.

Because the tension between the work that builds your name and the work that pays your rent doesn’t disappear.

You just get better at handling it.

Left unchecked, the work that sustains you will slowly replace the work that excites you.

Leave a comment

But most of the time, that isn’t what’s happening at all.

Creative industries are messy, overlapping ecosystems where jobs appear, disappear, and reappear for reasons that are rarely personal and often invisible. Yet freelancers have a remarkable ability to interpret every movement around them as evidence of competition. The artist beside you becomes the threat. The peer becomes the rival. The room becomes smaller than it actually is.

Which is strange, because in practice the opposite is usually true.

Freelancers misread normal industry movement constantly. A stylist uses a different makeup artist one season and suddenly the narrative becomes: I’ve been replaced. A brand works with someone new and it’s interpreted as a strategic shift. A quiet month appears and somehow that too becomes evidence that someone else has taken your place in the order of things.

But if you actually look at how fashion and beauty operate, the reality is far less dramatic and far more practical.

People hire people they trust.
People recommend people they trust.

And most careers move forward not through rivalry, but through networks.

This is one of the least discussed truths in freelance creative work: your peers are often part of the infrastructure of your career.

They’re the people who recommend you when they’re double-booked. They’re the ones who say your name in a room you’re not in. They bring you onto teams, suggest you for campaigns, or quietly tell a client, “She’s brilliant, you should call her.” Entire careers are built on those small moments of professional generosity that rarely get documented anywhere.

And the thing about these networks is that they’re subtle. They operate quietly. You don’t always know they’re happening.

Someone stands up for you in a conversation you never hear. Someone says something kind about your work that shifts the perception of you slightly upward in the room. Someone defends you when something goes wrong on a job. Someone passes your name to a casting director or a producer or a stylist who is building a team.

None of that looks like competition.

It looks like community.

Fashion, despite its reputation for drama, actually runs on this kind of trust. Teams reform again and again across different projects. Assistants become key artists and bring the people they respect with them. Photographers recommend the makeup artists they like working with. Stylists call the people they know will deliver. Producers build lists of names they can rely on.

And slowly, almost invisibly, careers start to move.

When you understand this, something important shifts. The people around you stop looking like threats and start looking more like colleagues in the same ecosystem.

Which isn’t to say competition doesn’t exist. Of course it does. Clients have options. Jobs are limited. Creative industries are unstable by nature.

But the real competition is rarely the person sitting beside you.

The real competition is momentum.

It’s the difference between the people who remain engaged with their work and the people who drift. It’s the artist who arrives prepared versus the one who shows up hoping inspiration will do the heavy lifting. It’s the person who continues refining their taste and relevance while someone else slowly coasts on what worked five years ago.

Momentum is difficult to see in real time, but over a year or two it becomes obvious.

You start to notice who is still curious about the work. Who still cares about the craft. Who pays attention to the culture moving around them. Who is prepared when the opportunity appears rather than scrambling to catch up with it.

Preparedness, in creative work, is deeply underrated. The industry often celebrates the final image or the big campaign, but the real advantage tends to belong to the person who walks onto set knowing exactly what they’re doing. The person who has thought about the work before they arrive. The person who makes the job easier for everyone else in the room.

Because ultimately that is what most clients are looking for.

Not just talent. Reliability.

The kind of professional behaviour that makes people say, “Yes, bring her back.”

Behaviour on set matters more than people like to admit. Energy matters. Focus matters. Being switched on matters. Creative industries may present themselves as chaotic and expressive, but behind the scenes the people who sustain long careers are usually the ones who understand the professional rhythm of the job.

They show up ready, engage with the work. They read the room.

And when they do well, something interesting happens: the network around them strengthens.

People want to work with them again.
People recommend them more easily.
People defend them when things get complicated.

That kind of professional reputation compounds over time. Slowly at first, then quite dramatically.

Which brings us back to the original idea.

Your peers are not your competition.

In many cases they are the people quietly holding parts of your career together. They are the ones who create openings, pass along opportunities, and shape how your name travels through the industry. Sometimes consciously, sometimes without even realising they’re doing it.

The freelancer who treats everyone around them as a rival is usually misunderstanding the system they’re working inside. Because creative careers rarely grow through isolation. They grow through trust. Through collaboration. Through a web of professional relationships that slowly expands around you as you work.

And once you see that clearly, something else becomes obvious.

The real work isn’t trying to outrun the people beside you.

It’s staying engaged with the craft, behaving well in the room, and building the kind of reputation that makes other people want you on their team.

Momentum. Preparedness. Relevance. Professionalism.

Those are the things that actually shape a career.

Leave a comment