[Markulous]

Taking into account the comments on my previous upload (I hope, anyway!)

Is a different shot when I got a bit closer - foal had moved but not far (I've flipped it 180 deg for variety! )

[CathieT]

Hmm - much better!!

Might be tempted to clone out the grassy stuff though ... not green enough to be instantly recognisable.

[Dabhand16]

Works OK for me - and I like it better than the first one.

[skipper954]

I like this better as well, but the horse is backwards.

skip

[Boofers]

nice upward clear blue sky, what else do you need. The flowers look like they were dabbed on with a water color brush,,nice Mark,,

[Charlotte]

Prefer the original

[Markulous]

Appreciate you taking the time to comment, everyone!

Clone out the grass and the foal would be eating buttercups, Cathie!

So it's just you that prefers the original, Charlotte? Don't tell me - this not saturated enough! LOL!

Yeah, 'tis backwards, Skip! And yes, think it does make a difference - prefer it facing the "right" way (as per the previous shot). Know there was some discussion as to whether we prefer things running from left to right (as most of us read that way) and I have to say that I do prefer that orientation for my shots - so you'll see the left to right more often than not!

[skipper954]

I said that half in jest, Mark, but I think that left to right orientation IS more comfortable.

I wasn't sure if I didn't like the reverse because I had seen the original or some other reason.

skip

[Markulous]

Originally Posted by skipper954

I said that half in jest, Mark, but I think that left to right orientation IS more comfortable.

I wasn't sure if I didn't like the reverse because I had seen the original or some other reason.

Yeah, realised you were being tongue in cheek, Skip, but it's a point well made

Probably a bit of both: previous pic and preferring the left to right orientation

[Charlotte]

Ok here goes (why I prefer your first shot to this one) ...

The composition is unbalanced: The Rule of Thirds definitely applies here, but nothing is lying on a third anywhere.
The brightness needs toning down.
You've created an obvious gradient on the sky from top of frame downward and/or vignetted the top corners. Makes the sky look unnatural.
The flowers look overly PS-blurred.
Don't know why, but the foal doesn't look as appealing this close-up. Could be the way she's standing and/or holding out her tail like she's about to need a pooper-scooper.
The light is quite harsh + a lot of reflection off her coat, i.e. she's not as well-toned as your other shot.
The flowers look like they need the top levelling out (like they're nice + level, i.e. neater, in the 1st shot).
The magenta tinge on the foal is even more noticeable on this shot.
There is blue fringing on the grass she's eating + outlining her whole body, particularly noticeable on her mane + belly.
The patch of grass by her front legs looks odd (can't put my finger on why).
The low viewpoint doesn't seem to work as well with this close-up as it did with the other shot.

It's a nice shot, but not as nice as your other shot, which only had one hole to nit-pick

[Boofers]

Does that have anything to do with a gift horse...?

[CathieT]

No ... I meant the funny little piece in it's mouth .... sorry ...... but somehow it doesn't bother me as much now .....

[Markulous]

Originally Posted by Boofers

Does that have anything to do with a gift horse...?

LOL!

Originally Posted by CathieT

No ... I meant the funny little piece in it's mouth .... sorry ...... but somehow it doesn't bother me as much now .....

Oh good, so no more "Aussie deprives foal of food" headlines?

Originally Posted by Charlotte

Ok here goes (why I prefer your first shot to this one) ...

Thanks for this, much appreciated. Interesting that some of your responses are down to perception (and, I believe, just as important! If the horizon looks skewed, what does it matter if it isn't?)

Originally Posted by Charlotte

The composition is unbalanced: The Rule of Thirds definitely applies here, but nothing is lying on a third anywhere.
The brightness needs toning down.
You've created an obvious gradient on the sky from top of frame downward and/or vignetted the top corners. Makes the sky look unnatural.
The flowers look overly PS-blurred.
Don't know why, but the foal doesn't look as appealing this close-up. Could be the way she's standing and/or holding out her tail like she's about to need a pooper-scooper.
The light is quite harsh + a lot of reflection off her coat, i.e. she's not as well-toned as your other shot.
The flowers look like they need the top levelling out (like they're nice + level, i.e. neater, in the 1st shot).
The magenta tinge on the foal is even more noticeable on this shot.
There is blue fringing on the grass she's eating + outlining her whole body, particularly noticeable on her mane + belly.
The patch of grass by her front legs looks odd (can't put my finger on why).
The low viewpoint doesn't seem to work as well with this close-up as it did with the other shot.

Not sure why this pic particularly demands rule of 1/3rds but arguably the buttercups are close; the foal occupies approx 1/3rd space. I tend to go with what the image suggests, so I keep an eye out at composing stage but try not to let it dominate my thinking (and I'm first to admit that this occasionally happens! But not here!)

Brightness, gradient, magenta, blue fringing are all things that I've probably introduced, so will reconsider them

Stance of foal, harsh light, closer shot and slope of field are really down to the comp - not much I can do other than wait for a better pose/time of day/part of field. And, BTW, totally agree - they do legislate against the shot!

Flowers weren't blurred - not touched other than minor tweaks in PS - possibly what's affecting the grass

Originally Posted by Charlotte

It's a nice shot, but not as nice as your other shot, which only had one hole to nit-pick

LOL! Well, as I say, many thanks for taking the time and trouble!