>>3146981I'm going to assume you are
>>3146971just because the style of criticism is so similar.
Thanks for the follow up tips, though. I can see how the second picture I posted is stronger based on your input. With the first one, I think the thing that mainly caught my eye was the delineation between the sky and the ground. There was just something about how they flowed together that I thought was appealing but in actuality it didn't add much to the photo.
I think your comment about the psychology of the photograph is incredibly insightful as well. I posted the aforementioned photo as a reaction to an opinion about the disjointed nature of the prior photograph. Immediately after posting this photo in response, I found another photograph highly similar (pic related) that I thought was better, but the comment about psychology, specifically "the viewer is faced with something... potentially impassable" changed my mind. I thought the tree in the left of frame was a distraction but it serves an important purpose: it obscures the rest of the rock, giving the illusion that the rock is much larger than it is. Fascinating stuff, I hope I can use this to further improve my photography. Thank you.
