House of the Sun God, Haleakala.

Crop out all the sky but for a small strip (to still give perspective). As is, the top 1/4 distracts from the quality bottom 3/4.

Yes, i find it appealing and not only that, because this is a fantastic photo with an amazing view with great landscape and colours. Very well composed and presented. Best regards LKV.

fantastic colors!

Thanks Tim for your suggestion. I prefer the to keep the crop as it is for the following reason. The frame is divided into three distinct horizontal bands: the blue sky, the serpentine sweep of the volcano's floor, and finally the crater's rim in the foreground. I usually do not follow the "Rule of Thirds" in my work but this one was the exception.

I would like to thank Irina, Lennart, Carolyn and everyone for taking the time to visit and leave a comment or two. Regards.

Great shot. Love the leading lines and the light pools that lead to the distant peak in clouded mystery. Great detail everywhere. The sky gives it balance IMO, especially darkening to hold the eye in. It's nicely bounded all around. The only thing I have (and probably/maybe it's my screen resolution) -the meeting of the red and lighter sides of the photo in the almost dead centre look unbelievably abrupt, I'll put it down to my pixel limitation.

thanks for the visit! You might be interested in viewing Vince Tylor's version of this location. Somewhat different lighting and a different emulsion but the red area still abrubtly terminates at the crater floor. I think it may be a little more pronounced here because I shot it with a 6x7 and Vince uses 135. It's just the way it is. Regards.

Wow, that was interesting. Having seen Vince's (both A++) I now appreciate the sweep you have with the foreground rocks that push you down into the valley. It's great to see 2 interpretations, thanks.

amazing from color, and composition till heaven!

Composition, amazing !

excellent photo! great colors, textures, composition. 7/7

Hi Walter, impressive image. The colors' vibrance is appealing, but may be on the heavy side. I like the composition; can't judge the quality due to, as you called it, 'the photo.net compression monster'. That may be my main objection of all the changes in the new site. 1600 pixels at the wide end is not very 2022 to put it mildly and there is no way to enlarge a photo on screen. The full screen option is the same size without the comments on the right and comes with an undesired vignetting at the top and bottom. I would suggest moving up to at least 2400 pixels, or, as it used to be, no size limits at all.  Now, very detailed images have become just 'pictures'. That is not why I subscribed in 2018. I realise that sounds like complaining, and may be it is. 

Kind regards, Vincent