I don't do landscapes

I don't do landscapes either but I feel the lighting is a bit flat for the subject, perhaps a conversion to B&W would work, fiddle with the contrast and add a bit more drama to the skies etc.

On the other hand if you'd zoomed in on that Dragonfly hiding in the reeds I'm sure you'd have done a fantastic job Each to his own

I like them both

Of course different lighting would change them but you have to work with what is available

I have landscapes taken within minutes of each other that look very different due to the lighting

All you need now is a naked young lady in both and they will become almost universally popular and you would be an 'artist' (no disrespect meant to those togs taking nudes)

I like the first one, but perhaps it might have been better if the horse and cart had been there at the time - link

Constable didn't seem to mind cutting the building in half, but his white balance might have been just a bit off.

Philip

Thanks for the advice, I really think I need to look at the surroundings a lot more before taking landscape shots.

You got that just about spot on

Already did that, you should have seen it before I added drama to the sky .. it was more or less pure white. Don't think it was the best day for me to try my hand tbh.

Anyway, a lot for me to think about before my next outing

For my taste the first picture is better because of the foreground. The richness of the green reeds is preferable to the stone base of the second image.
Barrie is not keen on the composition of the first picture which leads the eye out over the bright water and through the gap in the trees. But I like that, it encourages you to explore the scene.
The lighting that day was clearly flat so you have already tried to increase the moody effect by darkening the sky. I would take this a stage further and go for an even darker mood.
Criticism of the white balance is interesting, to me the slight yellow cast adds to the richness of the colour in the stone building and enhances the picture.
Good to get balanced analysis from a wide range of members; so often unexceptional scenes masquerading as landscapes get rave notices on this forum. These pictures are worthy of serious debate.
David
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

Hi, I think it's a great picture. Whatever anybody else

says, I like it a lot.

Regards, Horst

I say flip.

The left to right 'reading' of these images I think gives prominence to the landscape beyond the buildings. But I think it is the buidlings in both which are the more interesting parts of the images and need to be given more prominence within the landscape.

In the first the eye settles on the right hand third line, finding the gap between the trees. Cropping at this point, dispensing with the right hand side would make the mill more prominent in the image and would make more use of the lead in line of the lily pads. Flipping the image horizontally gives more prominence still and the lead in becomes an ideal left to right.

The second image I think has more potential as the building is much more interesting. The stone wall runs opposite to the 'reading' of the image and acts as a barrier to the pond beyond. The composition actually feels a bit uncomfortable. Flipping the image horizontally on the contrary makes the wall a perfect lead in to the mill. I would again crop in the gap and lose what becomes the left hand side once flipped. It's a shame about the keystoning which if corrected limits things a little.

I still stand by this and you would be testing the water resistance capabilities of your body, your camera body and lens!

And if you're lucky it might even be the start of the Nudes shooting season over there somewhere.

I did wonder if anyone else picked up on that

Constable came to my mind too.


He should have bought a K-5IIs