Just a Local Trail

Instead of watching the Super Bowl, I went for a hike. The weather was too beautiful to waste the day cheering for the Steelers

#1

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/s_olszewski/5​423840649/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/s_olszewski/5​430512866/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/s_olszewski/5​424441634/

Any love for me? I'm really looking for some feedback since landscape is on the bottom of my photo list.

Should I remove that bird in #1? It kind of looks like sensor dust at first glance.

I like #2. Did you have the camera in landscape or portrait?

With both number 1 and 2, you need something to really get the viewer's attention. They're both pleasant scenes, but there's nothing that really draws you in as the viewer. With landscapes, you're kind of looking for a line that draws the viewer in, foreground tension, strong contrast, or exquisite detail. 3 is a fine concept, but it's shot in challenging light, and it's always difficult to blend people and nature. It can be done, but I think it generally comes out best if you have people interacting with nature, as opposed to passively experiencing it.

1 definitely has possibilities. If you focus more tightly, you can put attention on the trees (and how the dead-looking trees clash with the vivid green grass), or you could frame a little less tightly than that, and "study" the "valley" between the two smaller hills.

tueltzen wrote in post #11811667
I like #2. Did you have the camera in landscape or portrait?

Landscape and hand held. Maybe portrait would work better.

fnothaft wrote in post #11811703
With both number 1 and 2, you need something to really get the viewer's attention. They're both pleasant scenes, but there's nothing that really draws you in as the viewer. With landscapes, you're kind of looking for a line that draws the viewer in, foreground tension, strong contrast, or exquisite detail. 3 is a fine concept, but it's shot in challenging light, and it's always difficult to blend people and nature. It can be done, but I think it generally comes out best if you have people interacting with nature, as opposed to passively experiencing it.

1 definitely has possibilities. If you focus more tightly, you can put attention on the trees (and how the dead-looking trees clash with the vivid green grass), or you could frame a little less tightly than that, and "study" the "valley" between the two smaller hills.

Thanks for the input.