tmjacobs

Well, the problem is not that it's too much -I do quite a bit of post-processing too- but it's not well done and too noticeable: there are weird color effects in the sky and the colors of the landscape seem a bit too desaturated. I would go back to the original and try again.

The colors are nice, but since you have photographed this with the sun behind you it's a bit 'flat', I mean to say there are no shadows which would give it more depth and dynamic range. The foreground trees for instance don't really stand out and almost 'blend in' with the landscape. Also I don't particularly like the 'fade' effect you applied near the edges of the photo.

If you didn't use HDR it looks like you did some more post-processing besides adding the window from another exposure: the dynamic range is too limited for my taste and because of that it lacks in depth and 'grandeur' IMO. Also the colors look too saturated. This photo of the vaulting shows what I mean, I hope: it has, I think, more natural colors and dynamic range (although it is HDR). I didn't shoot the classic nave shot because I think the banners are simply horrible in their colors and design.

 

 

Superb!

It's an interesting composition, but IMHO the right part doesn't really add anything to the photo. A moon in the upper right would have been sufficient. Perhaps taking this earlier, so one can still distinguish the landscape from a dark blue sky,would have made the right part more interesting. Anyway, detail and exposure are good.

While it has its charm - it looks like a screenshot from a pc game - the colors are too unnatural IMO.

The sky looks unnaturally red to me, certainly not like the 'neutral' filter I see under details.

The post-processing (and/or HDR processing, I suspect) should be better. There's an unevenness in the blue sky and some of the green tones look too 'fresh'. The composition is a bit too busy IMHO.

It doesn't quite work, for me at least, for a few reasons: composition isn't particularly interesting. I would have chosen a different viewpoint and place the pylon more to the left of the frame. Apart from that the pylons and wires don't really stand out from the sky. Furthermore I think the sky is a bit too 'heavy' and looks somewhat overprocessed. I did a quick PS adjustment to show what I mean.

In all honesty I think it's a bit dull. Light isn't particularly good and the composition could have been more interesting.

I would say it has a quite a bit of an 'orange' color cast, was it really like this?

Nice colors & atmosphere. This must have been taken from just about the same spot I took this photo.

Colors (in particular green) seem rather oversaturated IMHO.

I think this is too saturated and it has a bit of a purple cast. Of course I don't know how it was when you were there, but this seems a bit too colorful. Composition and detail are very good though.

Beautiful, must have been an exhilarating day, hiking from rim to rim. But views like these make it worth the effort. (btw: I like your 3/3 comment!)

This is a lot better than the other one, much more natural. Although there are noticeable white edges, probably because of sharpening.

This is always very difficult to expose: a large difference in brightness between landscape and sky. Either the landscape will be too dark, or -as in your photo- the sky will be (almost) washed out. You might either use a grad filter for this, or apply HDR. Apart from these techniques you get the best results by underexposing somewhat: a too dark landscape has often still a lot of detail that can be restored in Photoshop, but a too bright sky is usually 'beyond repair'. Apart from this, the upload is way too large, that means everybody is viewing the small version and you have little control over the sharpness of the small version. Nice landscape colors though.

Hee! Mooie hoesjes zijn dat, daar in de linkerbovenhoek! Maar de gitaar mag er ook zijn.

Colors are quite a bit oversaturated.

What I miss in the comments so far is the issue of size: I think that, especially in landscape photography, "size does matter". In this case the large version is way too large to view as a whole, so my guess is that most people view the small version. I resized it to fit my monitor (24", 1920 pixels wide) and at that size it's a great photo, it has much more "grandeur" and detail than the small version. I agree however with some of the comments that the composition could be improved a little bit by moving a few steps to the left, so the stones would be more to the right and not interfere with the reflection of the mountain and bring more balance.

Apart from Ben's consideration uploading such a large version means everybody has to see the small version - the large version is way too large to fit on anybody's monitor. The small version is just a bit too small to show the grandeur of the landscape, something like 1200 pixels wide would be a nice compromise - that fits on most 1280x1024 monitors. Also doing the resizing yourself gives you more control over the sharpness. Apart from that: nice photo.

Beautiful indeed! Must have been a lovely day, there's very little that surpasses a fine winter day in Scotland. Only -very slight- criticism is that including more of the rust-colored bracken (as I see in the far distance) would have given some more tonal variation.

The HDR is too noticeable at the expense of realism.

Thanks for your comments. Judy: Dennis was right, actually. After his comment I did some more post-processing to remove the haze and this is that new 'de-hazed' version. Peter: this was indeed shot with a tripod. I used a 10-22 mm lens for this at its wide setting, so that gives plenty overlap between photos.

 

Thanks for your comments.

You might like to know this is a composition of 4 HDR photos in a 2x2 grid. That makes exposure control a piece of cake, and sharpness is of course no issue: the assembled image is 6000x4500 pixels.