Tranquility

Could be a beautiful image but this is too perfect, the water too still, the clouds not random but intended, the land too over-all sharp, the boat to overall sharp,the depth of field no real sense out to infinity. In other words, this is not the eye sees.

Why not just take the shot and leave it alone, do your light work with the camera, set the aperture as high in number (small lens diaphragm) as possible with not too long a long-exposure.(shutter-speed about 5 seconds, or put it on aperture-priority and the camera will pick the speed.) That'll give you good depth of field. Then don't try to make it "better" in photoshop, that will make it unnatural. At most adjust exposure in PS if need be.

What you need is an old folder, like a film camera I have with a great Zeiss lens. Completely manual, and manual-on-your own. You can't even see focus thru the viewfinder, it's just  a piece of glass and uncoupled from the taking lens.

You use depth of field settings for focus/distance or use estimates of distance to put into the lens.

This shot would be depth of field. Everything  from the camera out to 25' would be out of focus, everything past 25' to infinity in-focus. To get that you'd set the aperture to the smallest diaphragm (highest f-stop), the distance at infinity and give it a speed say of 15-20 seconds. There's no light meter but there are easy ways to get a good estimate of light and corresponding exposure-adjustments on the camera. Of course you use a tripod.

But you need to learn photography, not more computer design.

Buy a good simple film camera, can't beat a folder, read up on basic photography, buy a few roles of film (my camera would be medium-format film) and start. You have a good eye but you're mucking it over way too much.

My view anyway....

This is a beautiful image, real or recreated. You are thinking like an artist. Keep it up regardless of what others think

Mike

Gerald,

Thank you for your comment regarding my PHOTO OF THE DAY, I would wish to respond as follows.

With  all due respect I'm not sure that you are understanding what I'm doing here.

I produce digital photographic art, limited edition archival fine art digital prints, produced for someone to hang on a wall. This is not always my own personal choice but in the main I produce prints to sell, and I do sell a lot of this type of print.

I also teach photography so I have a full understanding of all aspects that you mention., and coupled with the fact that I have been photographing for 50 years there is not a lot left regarding the subject that I do not understand.

With regards to equipment I do not need any type of film camera or indeed the film to go with it. I have a full digital set up comprising in excess of 50K worth of equipment including 2 of  the latest Canon 1DX bodies, a Canon 7d body and a full range of Canon lenses from 600mm to 10 mm. I also have a fully equipped photographic studio. If I were forced to revert back to film capture then I am afraid I wouldn't be photographing at all.

i welcome any form of constructive criticism regarding my work, but unfortunately I am unable to draw anything positive rom your presumptions comments whatsoever.

I hope you continue to enjoy your film photography as much as I enjoy producing my photographic art and the post processing that goes with it.

Kind Regards,

Mike Neale

Michael,

Many thanks for your comment regarding my photograph, your feedback is very much appreciated,

Kind Regards

Mike Neale

Try going back to basics. Get some nice shots in camera and only use PS for modest adjustments. This is a Frankenstein landscape shot!

Jim, IMO you forgot to add a bunch of "I think", "In my opinion", "Personally, I prefer", or phrases similar to these.