What sort of tree?

I like the composition of what you've captured here quite a bit, but there seem (to me) to be a couple of problems with the photo:

• The grass is so light as to be almost white (especially on the extreme left) and this suggests some sort of overexposure.
• The shadows in the tree seem too dark for the lightness of the grass and suggests some sort of underexposure.

Unfortunately, because photo.net doesn't give us a way to state the ways in which ways a photo was manipulated I don't know if either of those effects was added after the fact (or whether it was the crazily vibrant blue or something else entirely).

For me the net effect is that the photo seems to have lost some realism -- everything is just "too much" -- and I wonder what the original shot looked like and if I'd find it more appealing.

If this level of contrast was in the original photo, then that suggests that it might be worth looking at using filters (especially graduated ones). I'm just starting to learn about this myself, but a graduated neutral density filter gives you the ability to tone down areas of particular brightness so that the overall photo is more balanced and within the detail tolerance of the film. It's worth considering since you've obviously got a very good eye for this type of thing.

I appreciate your suggestions and comments,

this shot was taken 1 hour before the sunset, so coming from the rhs there is a very strong side-light. So kind of normal to have dark parts inside the tree branches, I wasn't able to realise the overexposed part on the lhs, probably didn't bother me too much. Thats why we upload this pictures for, thank you, good eye!!

But perhaps as you suggested getting a graduated neutral density filter is the best solution, I was thinking about it, now I will definetely get one!

Here just for you the original one, you decide, I think this will solve your puzzles..

Thanks again,

Mert

a highly saturated version