I must say that this has turned into a fascinating thread. I personally can understand the purist point of view on this subject and can see how things could get a little "heated" over this topic.
However, the continuous jabs directed at the OP is IMHO childish and clearly is being repeated just for the sake of "stirring the pot" which is not healthy for anyone here or this forum. I think everyone that has posted in this thread has voiced their opinion of either the beautiful image and/or about the ensuing topic.
Continuous "stirring of the pot" might be viewed by some as a sign of envy.
Just because two words share many of the same letters does not mean they are the same word or have the same meaning. AKA SEMANTICS!!
A composition is a scene that we capture as Landscape photographers. Simple. For example we stand at the Grand Canyon and set up our camera and and as we adjust the camera and lens the resulting view we see in our view finder is our "composition".
Now compositing, would be if back at home in front of the computer, we took our fine composition of the Grand Canyon and now "composited" moon that was not there, and perhaps even "composited" in a wolf on the edge on the canyon that was not there. Compositing refers to the "pasting" in if you typically an object from one photograph into another completely different photograph.
I first opened this picture and thought "Wow, what a composition. Great framing, color, clarity... and a really unique juxtaposition of elements. Well seen and captured!". Only real criticism was that the sky in the upper left seemed a little heavy...a common characteristic that occurs because we like dramatic skies. Then as I sat and started enjoying the image I started noticing...the foreground doesn't quite hold together. The texture in the foreground doesn't look real. Then...hey, wait, I know how big those broad leafed plants are (I won't try to name them because I'll get it wrong), and I know how big dandelions are. For those dandelions to be that big in that position, they had to be on a hillock right in front of the camera. And there's no hillock. For those dandelions to be there that big they had to be inserted (euphemistically "nudged forward"). That's when my enjoyment of this picture fell apart and I started reading the discussion to find out if this was a natural or a composited composition. I didn't see JPG artifacts, or marginal compositing skills, etc. Much later I started noticing the disconnect between the lower foreground of "lillies" and the mid-ground river and grassy meadow.
I became really disillusioned with the image. Why? Because it was in the Landscape and Nature board, and I have expectations for the content of this board that the submissions are in-camera compositions, not composited. [for my purposes, "blending", i.e., HDR, focus stacking, are "in-camera"]
If this image had been in the Digital Art and Abstracts board, there would have been no disillusion, very little disappointment, and at least an appreciation of the vision that created the composition, someone else's comment "So Colorado!". And no need for a "blending/compositing" disclaimer.
I almost replied when I first saw this a few days ago, but held off. My initial impression was that it is a very nice image, and knew exactly where it was taken, or at least somewhere right around Trappers, which the Flat Tops are one of my favorite areas. I thought the conditions were great, as far as the lighting and clouds (which definitely look natural and legitimate, even after knowing some were added), but what really made it for me was the curvy stream. My brain didn't even process the ginormous dandelions in relation to the corn lily, even after a few views, but I kept coming back to the stream. I thought that was an absolutely tremendous section of river that you found, but I couldn't, and still cannot place exactly where that is from, but based on the alignment of the ridges, it would seem to me it should be somewhere around the Scotts Lake outlet into Trappers, but that section of water doesn't curve like this. I would hope that at least that portion of the image stayed legit, but after reading the comments about the other things, I am now having some doubts, especially since Matt Anderson pointed out the areas he was questioning. I hope this wasn't what you were alluding to you said you added "flow." However, even if the foreground, midground, and sky were altered, it still makes for a very nice image for what it is, and the blending can be hard to pick up on at first glance, but as suggested, this is likely not the forum for this presentation, and most certainly not if the stream was also modified.
Beautiful photo! I really like the placement of elements and how they lead the eye through the scene. With regard to scooting the foreground forward, I don't really think it's all that big of a deal. That's something I do with many of my photos, but it's something that can be done in-camera on a large format view camera. There is a way of enlarging the foreground or the background in a similar way to shifting the extreme foreground a bit forward digitally.
I enjoy the composition here and I won't comment on the whole, "is it right or is it wrong" discussion. I don't have an issue with blending but as you said, if we are noticing, it is an indication to you that there is room for improvement. I would just say that while I find the image very pleasing to my eyes the thing I couldn't get over is that the dandelions are disproportionate to the corn lilies. In my own experience, the corn lilies with their beautiful leaves are generally much larger than a dandelion would be. Good work, just wanted to add that point. Thanks for sharing.
Great photo.
As this isn't a work of photojournalism, I'm having a hard time understanding how there are rules and categories that the photo's creation must abide by.
But what really grabbed my attention was seeing a dandelion in that kind of alpine meadow at all.
In years of hiking in the alpine in different parts of British Columbia I've never seen dandelions growing at such a site.
Did you add the dandelion entirely from somewhere else?
If not, are dandelions and other invasives common in the Colorado alpine?
