Seeing and Creating, which is first?

Seeing space and creating space are two inseparable activities to an landscape artist. Yet, some time ago, critics tore them apart just 'to be precise'.

They said seeing, then conceptualising and finally producing a space (the artwork) was copying the real(-ism).

In parallel, conceptualising, then producing and finally seeing was expression(-ism).

Realism vs Expressionism? Why?

If I didn't see these real tree barks, could I conceptualise anything?

The natural texture of the barks gives the quality of rugged terrain for my mountains. So, I'm not just copying but importing (using) the barks directly. So, is this realism?

On the other hand, as a landscape painter, if I did't think of finding some material to better enhance the textural effect of my imaginery mountains would I go out to look for the barks?

My imagination/expression came first, yes?

So, what do you think of my works?