Iceland

SnappyChappy - that makes me think it could have been a scene from one of the "Lord of the Rings" films.

aliengrove - that's a painting!

The different impressions that the two images give shows how much can be achieved with a little PP.

I'm probably in a class of one here, but to me, photography is about whatever the photographer was aiming to do, and whether he achieved it or not!

That, and beauty being in the eye of the beholder, but as we know, no two beholders have the same 'eye'.

The thing I love about photography is, nobody's ever wholly right about anything. It's all so beautifully subjective, and even the hardest of the hard-and-fast rules are nothing more than jelly... if the subject or the treatment dictate otherwise.

In your case, I'd agree it's a more 'pleasing' image, artistically-speaking. In Davex's case, it's more realistic.

Which is right, and which is photography really about? Hmm, let me think...

Ok... got it... please select your answer from:

(a) Thursday, but I'll have to get it up on the ramps first and have a look.

(b) It's in the post, I promise.

(c) I was just cleaning it and it went off, officer.

One of those is bound to be right.

Probably...

I agree about everything being subjective. No one has to agree with anyone else about what they like.

I would take issue, though, with what seems to be an implicit assumption that more contrast, and more saturated colours make for more drama, or indeed more impact, except in a 'blimey, that's bright' sense.

There's a growing tendency to slap in a levels adjustment, whack the saturation up, sharpen to the point of making the eyes bleed, and imagine that it's better.

I don't think this necessarily follows.

I've got nothing against special effects used for artistic purposes, though. I just think they're a bit overused, and the 'impact' they have is a bit superficial at times.

Ypu are right of course, Neil, and Chris too, it's so easy with software to tweak a photograph that perhaps sometimes it is done when it isn't neccessary, or desirable. It can also lead to one looking at a photograph and automatically thinking "Need's a levels tweak", or "I'd give it a curves adjustment", without really looking at the photograph and what it's portraying. This picture is probably a case in point, I thought the scene looked a bit flat, so as Davex invited us to play with it, I went straight for giving it more impact, without really considering what it might actually look like in reality. That being said, I think I'd still tweak it were it my picture...

I also like Sanppychappys version, looks like Mordor, as Polchraine pointed out.

I actually quite like your one for its impressionist look. It's so unreal that it takes on a completely different character, and I find myself looking it at it not as a landscape, but as a combination of colours and impressions.

I'm all for such variety

But as a landscape, I like the original the best - its subtle other-worldliness comes across to me strongly without the need for adding contrast that wasn't there in the first place.

I'd love to see a much bigger version of it.