I have let this one marinate for a few months now and it is still one of my favorite compositions from the Sierra. If you remember, I have made some images along this theme and planning to eventually build a series from them. I am usually not a fan of the 3:2 aspect ratio, but for this, it seems to work the best.
All feedbacks and critiques are welcome; perhaps there are ways that I can improve the image that I have not seen. I am always grateful for your thoughtful comments here.
Adhika,
This one really caught my attention. The foreground is so interesting and full of detail. This is a great eye to compose this one as you have. I like the understated colors and contrast as presented . I might have liked a little more of the river bend included, but that is a very small nit and I assume it would not have added to the scene.
I can see why you are fond of this composition. Well done!
Adhika, I really like this. This captures the feeling of the Sierra for me, a place I love. My first thought was that I don’t like the river bend cut off, but the more I look at it, it doesn’t bother me. Everything else is so nicely composed, and there is enough cut off that it doesn’t look like a mistake. I agree that portrait 2:3 ratio can look too tall, but it’s absolutely necessary here. There was some discussion here recently about portrait 2:3 ratio images, and I remember someone saying something to the effect of “the content dictates the format,” and I think this is a perfect example of that.
The only thing I might suggest is to bump up the contrast just a bit. It feels a little flat to me.
This is really nice. The only nit I have has been discussed by @Craig_Moreau and @Alan_Kreyger. I agree that I personally would like the curve of the water not be cut off but I also agree that there is enough cut off that it doesn’t look like a mistake but was a conciouss descicion ( I’m having a brain fart this morning and I know i misspelled those two words LOL) on your part. If that makes sense. The tones are really appealing to me.
Glad to see to you turned to the “Long Side” for this image Adhika. I’m a 3:2 fan myself, although @Craig_Moreau is right “content should dictate format”.
I’ve never been to the Sierra, but your image does a great job conveying a sense of place, there is so much to appreciate in this image. The composition has a lot of things in it, but I think they fit together pretty cohesively. The foreground has a lot of elements in it, yet it has a lot of visual interest, since things fit together so well. I’m sure that took some time for you to figure out, but you succeeded. The processing looks great , the colors are gentle and pleasing. I think the contrast level is just right.
The cutting off of the stream is not perfect, but I suspect your comp makes the best of a hidden problem, it does look like a concious decision.
Really like this one, Adhika! The composition works perfectly in my opinion. The layers really keep my eye engaged with the scene and is very pleasing.
Other than the river being cut off (which was already mentioned), this is a winner in my book!
Congrats on a fantastic image!
Especially I like your composition, the rustic colors. It looks a bit like an other world, fairy-like. A place to be sitting on that water, fishing maybe.
Hi Adhika…it’s been a long time since I commented on an image (darn life getting in the way again), but I had to stop by and say hi.
As per usual, your colors are muted lending a sense of great reality to the scene. Looks like mid afternoon/mid-evening with filtered skylight leading to pleasing shadows and side lighting. The trees in the midground echo nicely with those in the background. The rocks among the trees also help build the relationship in both locations. Nice atmospheric haze in the far background.
I too am a fan of 3:2 format, but I am flexible and agree with the other reviewers that the content should define the crop. With that said, the nearest foreground rock garden does not add and to my eye distracts me from moving through the scene. There is greater harmony of the elements to my eye if the bottom rock garden/red dirt/grass is cropped out.
Thanks, guys! It’s good to hear these comments.
@Craig_Moreau, @Ed_McGuirk, @Jim_McGovern: Most of the time, I have often subconsciously composed for the 5:7 or 3:4 ratio but there are images that simply sing in the 2:3 ratio. I wholeheartedly agree, “The content dictates the format” is a very good principle to follow. I am still waiting for that opportunity where I can do a vertical panorama (9:16 or even a 1:2) format.
The consensus about the river bend is something that I have thought about as well, even as I was shooting this. I would have to move a lot more to the right to include the bend and it would change the arrangement of the elements in the FG and that was deal breaker for me. I feel that no information was lost even as I cut off the river (cinematic composition comes to mind).
I am of two minds about the immediate foreground rocks as well, Jim, perhaps it is my least favorite component of the image but it seems to be necessary to give breathing room to the “garden” in the midground.
It’s definitely a very nice place to cool your feet after a long hike, Ben!
This one makes me feel nicely peacefully in the high country. I like the understated presentation and you have composed it well. Nicely done.
I’ve normally stuck with 2:3, but have been trying to keep an open mind to shorter verticals when out composing after some of your comments in prior threads. I’m chuckling to myself here though, because I probably would have cropped this to a 4:5. 
I like the composition that John created with that crop. It puts more emphasis on the river which is the main source of interest.
Lovely photo Adhika. My only nit is that the top of the photo lacks the color and contrast intensity of the rest of the photo, and draws my eye there. I suggest increasing the saturation and/or darkening it a bit to keep the eye from wandering there.
Thanks, @Tony_Siciliano. Very interesting observation. Perhaps @Jim_McGovern feels this way too but I feel that the mid-morning atmospheric haze at the top part is actually a plus in the image because it adds depth to the image. I would take another look and see what increasing saturation and/or darkening work on the image.
I actually don’t feel that way and prefer the atmospheric haze as is.
@John_Williams nailed it for me! There’s enough room to still appreciate the midground as a “garden”, which by the way I really like and agree with that descriptor.
