EnglishBrenda Loc: Kent, England

I am no expert at landscapes but my feeling is that using f8 or f11 with ISO 100 in aperture priority mode (to allow the camera to advise you on the length of the exposure) may have given better results. The exposure time would have been longer and so a tripod or another solid support would be totally necessary. Maybe, focus about 1/3 in or thereabouts.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

yes and yes!

DaveC1 Loc: South East US

You can get out the "clone brush" in your PP software and remove that pesky limb from the photo.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I was wondering why you chose f4.5? For a scene like this I would normally use F16 or higher (my lens goes to 32). That would give you more depth of field and help with the distant elements, I think. Also, to my eyes it looks a bit light. But then I'm frequently accused of getting my images too dark.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

In RAW, I'd work on Clarity and Vibrance for sure, pull the Highlights down to help,with the sky, maybe some contrast to make the colors all pop a bit more. Also need to straighten the photo to make the prominent tree vertical. Then send it to the Editor and work with Levels and Enhance tools to finish it up.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

This reply is on the money, and leaves room for your decisions. I agree with it totally.

EdR Loc: Gig Harbor, WA

If you hit quote reply when you answer someone, then all will know who you are responding to.

hightor Loc: Portland, Maine

There are many interesting suggestions here, but I feel the main problem with this photograph is the quality of the light when you took the picture. It suffers from very flat light, maybe the sun was very high, shining basically straight down from slightly behind you and from your left. The light we choose to take a picture in is SO important to the image, and here I think you may have chosen the wrong moment. (Obviously we don't always have a choice!) Light that offers contrast, interesting shadows and a combination of lights and darks is going to enhance any image, so besides the subject itself, the quality of the LIGHT is always important. The sun being low in the sky always offers more opportunities. Many times, it's really the light itself that we're photographing, and the subject is just a means to see that light.

RJWagons Loc: Lake Ridge Virginia

You did the same thing I used to do (or often do) and that is you try to get too much into the picture. It's a beautiful landscape area but, as others said, if you want to draw attention to the fisherman you should get closer because I didn't even notice him at first. For example, the stony hill on the left doesn't really add anything to the picture so you could crop from there - or reposition yourself if you can go back to that area. Also, yes, a circular polarizer would help with the color. I don't use a lot of photo editing programs but I'm guessing that you can do both of those suggestions in editing. You have a lot here to work with so you're well on your way. Congratulations.

BBBruce77 Loc: Eureka, Montana

Landscape photography is in most cases best done in the first and last hour of day light as stated above. The quality of light is all important.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Occasional haze on distant hills and flat, grey skies are a fact of life for most. Some days are clearer than others, and some skies are more photogenic than others. Haze and flat skies can both be improved in PP, but it's not easy, especially if you want a natural look for the end product (I find that exposure bracketing gives more workable files than a single exposure will give, and that includes properly exposed single exposure raw files). Weather is an ever-present factor, and the best thing you can do is try to make the most of the better weather.

OZMON Loc: WIGAN UK

Maybe f.8 or f.10 would have given you a better background,and maybe a polarizing filter too.but all in all not a bad p[ic.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Your second sentence is the key to your situation. Since we now know for sure that the figure is in fact a fisherman you might realize you are asking a 200mm lens to do something for which it was not made to do. No lens is going to let you include everything and from an unlimited distance. As a photographer you decide what is included in your frame and what is omitted. Learning what is to be omitted is a very big challenge for all photographers, not just new ones. If the fisherman is your subject we should be able to see what he is wearing and it's color. That is detail! The range in the background is really that, background. Use the size of the fisherman to set the scale for the mountains. As presented your photograph has no subject because everything is too far away from the viewer.

10MPlayer Loc: California

I agree that the light is flat. Better to catch the scene at daybreak or in the hour before sunset if at all possible. Haze on a mountainscape is a natural occurrence. Taking too much of it out with the dehaze tool can make the image look over-worked. If you do it go lightly.

RodB Loc: Dallas/Mckinney

The lighting alone makes it very difficult to get a great shot. Good suggestions have been made to improve that... early and late light, etc. If the shot was done for example with morning or evening light from the left... you would have a darker sky, the mountains would have been much darker and if the fisherman was much closer, he could have been the point of interest yet with a wider lens there could have been a complete scene. The fisherman is just too far away to become a point of interest... thus only acts as a size reference.

If the light was early or late from the right somewhat coming at you but behind the tree... you would have had some real interesting shadows and shape on the background.

I cropped it differently because all the open rocks on the left were dead space and I darkened the scene (too light of an exposure) and I selected the mountains in the background and the sky to darken them. The crop I chose was my take on the best for what you had shot. I realize cropping is subjective, but you did ask for comments.

As said earlier... lighting is everything. I wouldn't shoot landscape in the middle of the day except when you get that perfect scattered cloud cover where the entire landscape looks like its under a large lightbox and all looks great. Better lighting eliminates almost all post production digital imaging.

Lots of tools in Photoshop to darken the sky etc... remove haze.

Hope this helps.
R