Thanks Alexeyz, Sherri, Alistair, Kaden. I appreciate the feedback.
Thanks Kaden for the specifics - 4 and 1 look better bigger - but in 4 the thing that really appealed was the reflection of the sun on the tips of the trees that cannot be seen in the size I posted. I am going to repost these bigger this evening but I agree with your input. 1 I thougt was best for interest but I see what you say about conflict between near and far. When you see bigger let me know. Thanks.
Scott,
Theses are beautiful images. Each is well-composed and captured and has its own strenghths. My 10 cents (2 cents each)
1. A bit of competition between the path on left and eye being drawn along the water to the sunlit peak on right.
2. Beautiful, but I agree with Kaden's comments re apparent horizon, softness.
3. Excellent. Not sure it "needs" the foreground tree, but works well.
4. Very pretty, less interesting than the others.
5. My favorite. Has it all. Beauty, wonderful reflections, no competing elements, nice colors, framing, etc, etc.
Congratulations!
Scott G
In looking at these larger sizes it makes #1 a bit more appealing.
Interestingly I saw recently an exhibit of Chinese Modern Art at the MOMA SF
and I was absolutely stunned as to how BIG the size of the art pieces were. I
have since became more aware to these cultural differences and how we view
size in art.
Now check this out, the first photographers of daguerreotypes, ambrotypes,
and tintypes in the middle to late 1800s made most of their images in very
small sizes. I am still terribly fascinated by small images preferencially.
