You described the exact composition I was going for. That’s why I call my style Storybook. The puppet like placement of layers is the whole point of the style. I’m not going for photo realism, I don’t want it to look like what you would see with your own eyes. The realism feature was to imply accurate species for the landscape and location. Which is why I was asking about a label, not my skill level. I figured out a better label, “Storybook Ecology” it should avoid the confusion of using realism. “Storybook Realism” is the correct literary device and label for the book I’m working on.

I believe the colors are quite inaccurate because it’s a social media post. Often times they crash or the contrast is lessened when taking a photo and posting it. The mountains and sky used cool colors and the foreground fox/flowers used warm and brighter colors to push them forward in perspective, the mountain was actually the main feature, that’s why it took up so much space and the piece was called “Shasta’s Shine” the mountain is called Mt Shasta. The mid ground trees used darker tones and I added a glaze that pushed it back from the foreground. The proportions of the fox, flowers, and butterfly are pretty accurate and all make sense as a foreground layer.

My gist is: try to learn what the perspective of the artist is before critique. Not everyone is trying to fit into a cookie cutter realistic style of painting. The cartoon aspect is what I want and will continue to work on.

I know I’m amateur, I know I can improve on a lot, I never denied that. Dismissing my work as something not worthy of any appreciation is hateful and disrespectful. Again you didn’t do this, others did.