If they were mine, I’d probably not enlarge the the first two as they stand. That being said, possibly working on the cropping or replacing sky might help somewhat. The third shot suggests that you have the skills to do better if you work at it!
For example, on the second try removing the left 20% and a tiny slice off top and bottom, and see how much it improves the image. You will probably also need to increase the exposure a little, and try some modification of contrast.
The first is more difficult; the ripple in the water causes diminished impact of the reflection. I don’t know of a way to improve that without better luck with a windless day.

I have large prints of several types, and for the most part metal/acrylic are preferable. I’m quite certain your third shot would look great in metal/acrylic, but the first two might disappoint.

It’s been a while. The number and variety of birds was huge, and often at rest so shots with a long lens were easy. Also a few sloths and monkeys, lots of beautiful vegetation. Birds were the best though, colorful, bright, and numerous. A couple of interesting villages and native people.

Turn the Tern around and turn the exposure up to turn the photo into better exposure.

Turn the Tern around and turn the exposure up to turn the photo into better exposure.

These are absolutely gorgeous photos!

No similar problems with M1 MacBook nor desktop iMac (2019, Ventura).

Never, ever, save everything. The lousy shots are, and always will be, lousy shots. By saving only the best, it reduces the time and effort of reviewing and enjoying the worthwhile memories and similar.
Simple example: In a difficult lighting situation, I bracket, then save either the best, or an HDR offshoot. There’s no reason to save the garbage!

Between this link and another above, I believe I’m beginning to understand the tiniest bit of this fascinating development. My personal biggest question right now is where the additional energy needed for image enhancement is added to the mix, needed to provide a useful image or hologram.* Recall that the when the light available from a mm scale lens is the point of entry of an image, it must have energy added to be enlarged and thus useful. The multiple layer nanoscale layers and astonishingly precise alignment of these layers seems to be well on the way to a solution; I hope I live long enough to see the further evolution of this process!!
* On rereading the links, the explanation is there, but so far I don’t understand it. I’ll keep trying.

Actually, this is a reasonable subject for further research. Within my memory, dozens of “impossible” devices have appeared, and I have no doubt that new and currently unimaginable devices will continue to appear. Did the people of past centuries imagine a device in their pocket that enabled instantaneous direct audio-visual contact with people on the other side of the planet? Men walking on the moon? Microwave ovens? Horseless carriages? The list is endless!
Never say never!

I’d choose number one. The head raised and mood is such that I can almost hear him bugle.
I’ve been around moose in the wild many times, and all of these represent reality done right, but #1 evokes special memories better than the others!

I just take my wife along. She remembers everything.

Canon makes IS binoculars too. In fact the IS binoculars were available several years before the IS lenses and cameras.

I've owned mine for several years, and I think it's an EXCELLENT travel and hiking camera. It's light, versatile, and IQ right up there with the best in it's class.

He'd peck as much wood as a woodpecker could if a woodpecker could peck wood.
Flicker? or Redheaded Woodpecker?