that's a great composition and really good shot you pulled off there.
In it's less processed form, it's a great image in and of itself. As is often is the case with really good images out of the box, post processing often has to be delicate to not actually detract from the image itself, if you know what I mean.
At first - in your processed version - there is that immediate WOW-factor with the color and the sheer magnificence of the vista itself. Your eye is pulled towards the distant horizon and you just want to be on that bridge..lol.
However, a second look and you are challenged a bit in your "suspension of disbelief" as you notice the haloing over the railing on the left side of the image. Seeing that you start discovering a little bit of a "too much" feeling when you look at the slightly too purplish water.
My intent is not to be a nag-bag here. I love post-processing and think that the distinction between in-camera and post-processing is completely artificial in a digital world. However, that is an utterly separate issue from the experience through your eyes and your brain.
At first your are captured by the illusion that this really is real - until you spot the indicators of over-processing.
As a photographic artist you are then faced with a choice:
- Perfect the post-processing so there is no overt clues that this is fake and achieve "suspension of disbelief" or
- Make a virtue of it and post process it so obviously that the viewer can appreciate it as it stands. I.e. knowing that the impression is partly achieved through post-processing, but not giving a damn because it doesn't pretend to be "real".
I hope it makes sense...lol..what I'm trying to convey.
Regardless, it's a really good picture and very close to being a great picture. Most importantly, it's very enjoyable to view.
Now get in touch with Noceo or one of the other Danes in these forums and have them do a similar shot from the Danish side of the bridge, so we can have a discussion about which side is better..lol.