Vertical landscapes?
This vertical landscape is a large painting (about two thirds of a full sheet) that attempts to recreate the visual impact of these monumental sandstone cliffs that towered above me while bushwalking in the Blue Mountains. Using part of my photo as reference I have reduced the composition to just the two large shapes of sky and stone for maximum impact, and used lost and found edges to define the broken contours of the cliffs and surface textures, with shadows indicating the three-dimensional forms. Have found that vertical landscapes can create emphasis and focus that is often lacking in horizontal compositions. Do you agree or do you prefer more traditional formats? Have you considered looking at landscapes by just focusing on one aspect? Interested to know what you think and how you see landscape - close up or always a distant view? All comments welcome.
‘Landscape looking’ as I refer to it is such an essential part of landscape painting - I’m glad you brought up the subject Marion. One of the defining aspects of our paintings , and what makes them recognisable as our own, has far more to do with the way we view the landscape and feel about it than the nebulous idea of ‘painting style.’ I find myself drawn to the intimate details of the landscape, just as much as the broad vista, often combining the two in one painting. Different formats are there to help us present and accentuate what we see and feel. A sweeping view along the coast often works well with the letterbox or panoramic format; portrait helps to promote vertical elements (as here) or being led up a path through the landscape; square is good for scenes that have multiple elements/focal points. When we are outdoors in nature we do not have to deal with spatial constraint - ie artificial boundaries(frame, mount, paper shape & size) that are forced upon us as painters. Understanding this and matching inspiration and subject to your chosen format is an important skill…..rarely taught or discussed.