I don't do landscapes

I don't do landscapes, whenever I attempt one they just seem to look a bit on the amateurish side when I see everyone else's.
Anyway, was in Sturminster Newton on Wednesday and passed a water mill so stopped for a quick explore and took a couple of shots including this one which I was quite pleased with.

So now please feel free to pick it to bits, tell me what's right (if anything) and what's not ...

Well... It's either a dead pixel, or a very small fly in the far distance of the horizon that needs to be cloned out, because it's so annoyingly obtrusive!!

Seriously though - I like it!! Perhaps given the overcast sky, the building is "overexposed"..??

If I find anything I don't like in this shot, don't worry - you'll be the first to know, Mike!!

Am I being too picky, but how many people have been lead straight to the bright water between the two trees and missed that beautiful brickwork?

You needed to be 4 metres to your right and 3 metres forward from the position you were in. Then rotate 15 degrees to the left to get a little more building.

Its not too bad at all really . If the building is going to be part of though, then yes, it has to be more centrally placed somehow, and ideally we want to see the whole building - it looks odd being cut off I think.

But colour and texture wise its great - nice muted tones, well balanced exposure .....

Ok, thanks for the input.

So would you say this was a better view/angle?

hmmm, not really for me. I think the main problem with both composition-wise is that you're splitting the scene in the middle - building on the left then receeding view on the right. The two don't quite 'gel' IMO. Much better to try and get the building across more of the frame, not just on one side - worth a try I guess

Both of them look fine to me.

All you need now is a dirty great "© MIKE-P PHOTOGRAPHY 2013" splattered all over them ...

Thats right, that'll make them look real pro! But come on Smeggy, have you forgotton your composition rulebook?

I thought I'd posted the original Mike! That's how I am with landscapes. I can't seem to get that extra something like some of the others on here.
Anyway, I like the first one the best and I agree a little cropped off the bottom will help. I wondered about flipping horizontally so the eye leads into the building?

Me
I prefer the second one as the wall leads me to the buildings first.
Although it does seem to be two pictures; the building and the lake.

I find landscapes to be very subjective. Four people viewing a landscape could come out with four different opinions on it. Unless you are looking to sell them then whatever works for you is 'right'.

Having said that, I much prefer your first shot to your second as i think the end of the building in No.2 is a bit too much 'in yer face' and the rest of the image doesn't really have much to compensate with. I also like 'cut-off' buildings and things to the side of the scene...they don't have to be complete for me although i know many people would disagree.

I suppose ultimately its down to what interests you and lots of practice..which you can do with digital!

Karlo

'Rulebook' ?


LOL

Far from an expert, but the white balance doesn't seem right for me. But that's only because you asked! Otherwise a very picturesque photograph!

Looking at the second shot I think it may well not have been possible to get "ideal!" landscape compositions without ending up in the drink!
Given that, I think the first is fine and the white balance adds to that old mill feel..

You do, do landscape Mike!