The center element in #1 kind of divides the image into two parts. Perhaps crop from the left side, making that element run closer to the edge of frame, and lift the shadows some. I sent you a pm.

In #2 the gravel path takes up a lot of space but leads us out of the frame. A potentially interesting element - the cliffs - are in shadow. Zooming in, I see several editing issues with the sky where it meets the landscape, as well as a distinctive hard-brush attempt at lightening the distant group of trees. Crop out the sliver of person on the right.

In #4 the landscape is very busy with lots of same-sized, same-color elements, much of which is due to the light (time of day). Perhaps consider cropping out some of the sky and a lot of the foreground? Work with curves or levels to try to separate tones a bit.

#3 could be awesome, but there is a distinctive white line where your sky meets the landscape, especially at the top left. You replaced the sky or did extensive editing?

For me the light was not your friend in any of these choices. Were the photos taken during a tour/trip when you didn't have the luxury of scouting or shooting in golden hour or appropriate time of day for shadows?

My own favorite landscapes have been a combination of right time (for example, just after sunrise or in clearing fog, or for autumn colors) and right place, or at a location I had visited before and was familiar with. They also represent many hundreds of miles of roaming the countryside over a five-year span

It would be #3 for me but I would crop away the sliver of water at the bottom. That little bit of water at the bottom is more of a distraction. The water would have been good to include if the photo was not cropped so tightly. Did you crop the photo that tightly in software or did you shoot it like that?

I agree with Linda From Maine about the light edges around the top of the mountain. It looks like a poor Photoshop selection when replacing a sky. If you did replace the sky, you needed to make a more refined edge selection. A good judge will spot that in a competition.

Photo #2 has a sickly blue sky in the upper middle of the photo that looks unnatural. The person on the right edge of the photo would need to be cropped out.

Photo #4 is the last one I would pick. The midday sun is harsh and flat. The photo has no focus. The eye wanders around. It's not clear what we should be looking at.

The center element in #1 kind of divides the image into two parts. Perhaps crop from the left side, making that element run closer to the edge of frame, and lift the shadows some. I sent you a pm.

In #2 the gravel path takes up a lot of space but leads us out of the frame. A potentially interesting element - the cliffs - are in shadow. Zooming in, I see several editing issues with the sky where it meets the landscape, as well as a distinctive hard-brush attempt at lightening the distant group of trees. Crop out the sliver of person on the right.

In #4 the landscape is very busy with lots of same-sized, same-color elements, much of which is due to the light (time of day). Perhaps consider cropping out some of the sky and a lot of the foreground? Work with curves or levels to try to separate tones a bit.

#3 could be awesome, but there is a distinctive white line where your sky meets the landscape, especially at the top left. You replaced the sky or did extensive editing?

For me the light was not your friend in any of these choices. Were the photos taken during a tour/trip when you didn't have the luxury of scouting or shooting in golden hour or appropriate time of day for shadows?

My own favorite landscapes have been a combination of right time (for example, just after sunrise or in clearing fog, or for autumn colors) and right place, or at a location I had visited before and was familiar with. They also represent many hundreds of miles of roaming the countryside over a five-year span