oyster_07 wrote:It's not uncommon for such paintings to involve a bit of artistic licence in order to better present a scene in a frame. This is particularly common with foreground details and compression of wider-angle features into the frame.
Lophophaps wrote:True. Also, many artists of the 1800s came from Europe, and had their own ideas about how Australia should be depicted. There's a print of Hannels spur and Kosciusko from the Geehi River that is not quite right. A von Guerard from Kosciusko towards Jagungal is also not quite right. Both of these and many more are good images but the reality is off a bit. Close scrutiny shows that some trees are native to Europe and are not found in Australia. In the late 1800s an Australian style became more prevalent, and hence more accurate as artists became used to the landscape.
north-north-west wrote:At least he gets the nearer details right.
I was looking through a thick catalogue book from a John Glover exhibition recently, and the difference between the pencil/ink studies and the finished paintings is quite stark. The sketches are incredibly accurate but so much in the paintings is exaggerated, particularly the peaks.
Return to Bushwalking Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests