Answer:
This question is describing the process
Explanation:
The reason its describing the process and not the product is because it talking about the moment, like its more important when drawing the piece instead of how its comes out. (I draw a lot and process is diffidently fun but if the product comes out how you like it its kinda satisfying lol.)
1. It meant that they are flat, unlike 3-dimensional objects: you can place them on a table and one of their sides will be a like. This also means that they cannot show depth very well.
2: It means that it can create an illusion or an abstraction, that we can consider aesthetic. For example, while we enjoy drawings, which are 2-dimensional, it could be that we would consider their 3d-version scary
3: the limitation is that they cannot show depth. For example, an orange appears as a circle, not a sphere: so a part of the information is missing.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
The role I think symbols can play in helping to visualize imaginative worlds is very important. Indeed, I think many times a symbol can substitute many words that should be carefully chosen to explain something.
A symbol, on the other hand, can sum up many words in one image, and that is the power of symbols.
Talking about Jeronimous B*sch, the famous Renaissance painter from the Netherlands, we can appreciate the use of symbols he used in great paintings such as the "Cr*cifixion of St. J*lia."
Using iconography, we should be able to read symbols. This concept of iconography was created by Erwin Panofsky to deeply analyze artworks focusing basically on important symbols that had meaning for the people of the time when the work was created.
Through analyzing symbols, we can understand the meaning and the emotions projected in the artwork.
Over the course of the early modern period, Europeans came to look at, engage with, and even transform nature and the environment in new ways, as they studied natural objects, painted landscapes, drew maps, built canals, cut down forests, and transferred species from one continent to another. The term “nature” meant many things during this period, from the inmost essence of something to those parts of the world that were nonhuman, such as the three famous “kingdoms” of nature: the animal, the vegetable, and the mineral. This article focuses on nature in this latter sense and broadens it out to include more recent understandings of the modern term “environment,” so as to encompass not only plants, animals, and rocks but also entire landscapes. Scholars from a wide variety of fields, ranging from the histories of science, art, and literature through historical geography, historical archeology, historical ecology, and landscape history, have long been interested in issues related to the environment and the natural world; more recently, they have been joined by practitioners of “environmental history” and additional branches of the environmental humanities and social sciences, who have drawn on these preexisting approaches and brought still further perspectives to the table.
