Took this while camping back in sept.

I love the fence and the foreground interest. The trees provide a nice framing for the image. Others might have a different perception, but I really don't care for the tree in the left third of the image. I think it detracts from the view of the mountains.

Diggin' the foreground leading lines, but to go along with Jim's tree, I think the leading line of the fence line "overshoots" the mountain by taking us a bit "past" the peak vs. leading us "toward" the peak.

Possibly a slightly different perspective, could have kept the fence from "overshooting" the peak and moved the tree Jim mentions to a slightly less imposing position.

That being said ...

Given the recognizable aspect of the peak, it seems to be the "obvious" aspect of "what's the point". But, given the amount of scale / balance to the fence, it makes me begin to wonder if the point is the fence and the mountain is secondary, or is the mountain supposed to be primary, with the fence secondary. Here again, if the fence didn't "overshoot" the peak by taking us past the center of the scene, then the balance between the peak and the fence would be a little less on the fence, shifting a bit stronger to the peak.

I'm a fan of foreshortening, and could see this one to be "all about the fence" with the Tetons being supporting cast ... or the fence being supporting cast. As is ... I'm left a little uncertain (liking both) who is supposed to be the lead character in this one.

I think I get using the tree that Jim mentions as part of framing, along with the fence leading lines, to make the Tetons the main character. I think that there are some cropping options that could help weight/rebalance things to aid the viewer have a little less ambiguity as to which of these two very nice subjects grabs the "What's the point"" / "What is the message that you want to convey to your viewer?" role.

I know that I often times want to answer that question with "BOTH" ... but "both" can be a tricky (not impossible) proposition that requires some deft nuance. Just some "food for thought" as you contemplate any changes to either this image, or future images.

Here's a couple crop variations (many more abound) to try and illustrate the weighting/rebalance that I was alluding to. (A little bit of sky cloning @ tree also.)

You've got some good stuff here to work with, just make some decisions to help your viewer a bit more and I think you've got a wall hanger in the making.

BTW ... what did you shoot this with? You've got some nice detail in both FG & BG.

This was shot with my old Pentax k10d and da 16-45 lens.

Nice shot of one of my favorite mountians. I agree however, I would like to see the third peak.

Good clarity here, both in air quality (no smoke) and in how you took and processed it.

"Hey that tree is in the way!" was my first reaction. Kent's crop answers that issue. I'd also suggest darkening the foreground and adding some vignette to guide the eye by lightly fencing the image. Opening the shadows can mine more detail, Selectively sharpening the foreground and mountains separately could also help.

Think I like the first one the best. Beautiful capture

Very nice.
I like Kent's second crop or Karen's (AuntiPode) crop best.
Really like the use of the tree on the right to frame and strong leading lines of the fence.
Scott

Late to the discussion, I prefer Karen's re-work.

Perhaps warm up the color just a wee bit?

A location I'd love to visit one day.

Regards,

Bob