Robin Dessureau wrote:
Nikon Cool-pix pocket camera with12x zoom lens, post processed in Smart Photo Editor. do notice purple fringe caused by the zoom lenses and the camera's small sensor.
Your experience and skill in photography far exceeds mine, yet if I may, I'd like to give an observation or two. Probably none of what I say is new to you and may not be significant at all.
The
content of a photo (what's seen) is objective, just a showing of what the photographer is presenting for viewers.
The
intent of a photo (what's meant, or what it's about), in the opinions of viewers, is subjective; affected by personal tastes, likes/dislikes, acquired teaching and/or experiences, interests, knowledge (or lack thereof) of the subject, "how
I would have done it", current state of viewer's self-classification of personal skill level, and other possible inputs.
The range of subjective conclusions following the evaluations of photos can potentially be vast and diametrically conflicting. Maybe not always. Maybe sometimes a photo can be so simple in its content and intent that conclusions don't widely differ.
In this beginner's opinion (maybe not widely held), the subjective conclusions pertaining to the intent of the photo strongly affect the decisions people make on how they would do editing to it.
Are they viewing it as a photo to be edited as a technically purist example of photography technique/training/sterile clinical example, or trying to render it as close as possible to the actual reality of the moment in the scene -- (or somewhere in between)?
You have included enough elements in the photo to give viewers a nice idea of the environment, its conditions and various details of the natural and manmade elements (in this beginner's opinion).
Only the color of dead leaves and the firewood and pallet at the shack, to me seem a bit unnaturally bright orange.