Dick,
That little zig zag in the FG rocks does a wonderful job of directing me into this B&W image and continues on with the MG rocks as they fan out toward the mountains. This does have a nice range of tones along with a moody sky. This is just a personal preference, but I could see adding a little contrast because of the flat lighting. Beautiful image.
Dick, there is no question the foreground is worthwhile here, with interesting shapes, textures and colors. There is definitely more of a connection between the foreground and background in this image.
I am debating one aspect of the composition however. The kidney shaped indentation in the LLC is clearly the strongest element in the foreground, and is dominant over the mottled pattern in the rest of the foreground. My eye starts with the kidney in the LLC and moves in a diagonal to the mid-ground formations. At that point I’m debating whether the visual flow then reverses to the mountains in the ULC, or whether the visual flow stops at the mid-ground. If you see it as the flow reverses course to the ULC, then one might argue the composition is heavy on the left, with a lot of negative space in the LRC.
The Calow image you linked handled this issue in a more traditional way, a symmetric comp with a centered foreground element that has a direct flow to the background. Your composition here is more complex and asymmetric, with a two step connection to the mountains in the ULC. I kind of like the more complex composition you have done, but it will be interesting to see if anyone else sees this as left heavy / negative space LRC.
Obviously the question of what is a good (if any foreground) is a personal decision and varies greatly amongst photographers. I tend to be a purest and often find myself in a minority opinion about a particular foreground. IMO the foreground in this photo is better than in your other post, but I still think the kidney shaped hole, with its brightness, is distracting and keeps the eye from flowing into the background. Also, I think it divides the photo into two competing smaller photos. Is it the subject, or is the background the subject?
That kidney shaped water pocket really was eye-glue-ingly bright. In the revised BW, I dampened that and a bit of the other FG. (attached, above) I can see that it is still a bit of an anchor, and cropping the bottom above that water pocket would be a decent image without that issue. (not attached)
In the underlying color version, it seems to me that the colorful lichens remove the emphasis from the pocket, and the FG works well. (attached below)
But then the sky and distant mountains seem superfluous. So the lower portion in a 4x5 emerges as a favorite. (attached below)
