opinions please on this from 14,000 feet

From southern CO.

Is it a keeper or can it be improved?

thanks!

.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

I think it needs a better foreground. In some ways the above is good in that it gives you that queasy feeling that you don't want to get any closer to the edge.

But, compositionally, it needs more of the image dedicated to the foreground rather than almost cutting it out the completely.

The lighting is excellent and helps with the 3-dimensionality. It looks to be just about high nood on a partly sunny day.

Your correct Robert, I was right at the edge.
Backed up a bit and took this one with a wider FOV, and it does seem better.
Would a different crop help?
.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

One thing to note is that the rule of 1/3 also applies to sections. So in a landscape shot such as this, you want 1/3 sky, 1/3 "greenage", 1/3 foreground/rocks.

I think you did this in your 2nd shot and it is more interesting. Would I be correct in saying that it was before noon on a cloudy day? This shot early morning or at sunset would probably be very nice.

Except for the distant haze, which you cannot do much about, I think you now have a better much picture than the original in many ways. However, what happened in the second picture is that the lighting is considerably different. There is now less contrast as the sky is almost completely overcast, and you don't see as many cloud shadows on the ground.

Last of series, done in B&W with sepia.
.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Why not - looks like it was worth it?
Very Nice!
It would be interesting to know why you cropped it as you did.

Just thought that it looked better, but then I've been wrong before.

if you like that's 50% of the battle right there. The only thing I would fix is a bit of completely blown out white on the top left 3rd of the image. Its sticks out like sore thumb with the rest of the image. Although now that I think about it, it could be a jpeg artifact so take a look at your raw+pp file.

Nice shots, I lived in CO for 10 years and know how challenging it can be to capture photos that do justice to the experience of "being there" (and I agree those 14'ers can be brutal, up & down La Plata kicked my butt!)

Decided to do a different rendition of the earlier B&W. I think it looks better, but I'm asking for your opinion.
.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

warming filters..

If I use the line formed by the base of the clouds, it looks a bit tilted downward at the left. What's your impression?
BTW, I like this last version the best.

I really like the first one. The meandering streams and reflective lake-lets are very interesting to me. Have you considered a portrait crop?

The streams and stuff in the second shot seem to get lost in the powerful panorama and become pretty much incidental.

NSG, will look at the filters.

Robert...The more I look...the more I think you have a good point.

Dami, will try that on the first one.

Thanks folks.