Harpignies was primarily a landscape painter; Google Images-search of his works turn up only incidental people in the landscapes shown. His style varied from clearly Barbizon-like detailing to somewhat more simplified paintings featuring obvious brush strokes. Some of these latter paintings are pretty small, though I did recently notice one on display at the Seattle Art Museum that was large and featured bolder brushwork.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I get the feeling that he was one of those artists who liked to use geometry as the basis for some of his compositions. I note a couple of instances below, but some of the other images seem to have the same feature.
This was painted when Harpignies was about 75 years old, yet it looks more Barbizon-like than some of his painting made years before, when Barbizon was more fashionable.
An early work. Solid, though I wonder about the composition where the foreground zone is about as high as the sky above the butte. Crazy me, I would have had less sky, because that's my usual choice when composing photos.
I don't have dimensions for this painting, though it doesn't strike me a being very large. Has a Macchiaioli feel to it.
This is a small painting, about 13x16 inches (32x40cm), so visible brushwork can be expected.
Sorry about the slightly blurred image, but that was all I found of this painting. Here the sky and remainder each take up about half the vertical distance.
A nice, clean painting with very little fussy detail. But note that the focal bridge support on the left side of the canal is approximately one-third of the vertical canvas dimension, the sky and foreground at that point each measuring close to another third each. Were geometrical relationships (slightly disguised or fudged though they might have been) intentional or simply the way he intuitively painted?