Does beauty in nature conform to the known and accepted aesthetic principles of color,balance,texture,symmetry,harmony etc.?
Actually we do not see such principles in application in nature. For instance does a painter paint bright green foliage against deep translucent sky as we often see in the summer sky, without playing down the blue of the sky? Yet this is what we see and enjoy in nature. The combination of colors in nature is dynamic and relative to the time and space of the moment.A painter cannot achieve the same beauty if he does not employ the commonly accepted aesthetic principles of color combination,color texture,contrived color effects, creating an ideal artistic space which can be appreciated by the human mind.
The “combo” effect of several elements present in the beauty of nature cannot be reduced to the enunciation of a few principles as in art.The beauties of nature are something we all enjoy without the need to break them down to a few principles of critical appreciation.
The beauty of nature goes much beyond the aesthetics of human appreciation .There is something about nature which appeals to you even when there is no conformance to the known and accepted principles of aesthetics. Take for example the texture and shapes of the straggling boulders of our Hyderabad rock-scape which are pleasing to the eye despite the randomness of their arrangement.A sculptor would impose some formalism on their existence ,position under the sky,sharing of space with foliage,their own textures and colors related to the sky of the moment etc. You will not find in them a symmetry such as we attempt in art .For example an artist will not paint just a single rock under the sky but juxtapose it with another flatter rock ,a road or passage and fill the canvas with two or three palm trees.That is how symmetry is sought to be achieved .In nature we find randomness which is the opposite of harmony and the absence of deliberate positioning of objects.