First upload for critique

might be my monitor, but the contrast could use a boost.

Knowing the limitations of scans and such, and the fact that you use 135 film which makes it difficult to tailor each scene to one exposure and dev time, I will propose the following critique on what this picture needs. To make ordinary scenes "pop" as it were one needs to make them shine or glow in some way. This is achieved through increased local contrast. General contrast can stay low or high, this being a matter of taste and is really subject determined. This scene cannot simply be improved by moving to a higher grade of filter - the result would be to blow out the white bits even further. The contrast range of this scene demanded increased exposure and tightened development in order to reign in those pesky white bits and thus allow you to move up a grade or 2 to achieve a nicer radiance in this photo. I would reshoot if this is possible, increase your exposure (unfortunately it was unrecorded) by two stops, perhaps 3. Bracket if you have to. And then develop for 30 per cent less time than you did with this roll.

Composition: I would crop the top 1/5. The tree stumps on the upper right corner are a distraction, not to mention those highlights around them.

Troy, the biggest problem I have with the image is that I just can't seem to figure out what the focus of the image is. Is it the water or the rocks? Cropping out the tress as Frencesco suggests would put more focus on the water and tighten the composition a lot - sort of make it an abstract.

Another viewpoint: I think that the trees and light in the background are the most interesting part of the picture.

Thanks Francesco. Your explaination will (I hope) help me improve on a couple of shots I have will similar contrast. I get the max black on the print but it still looks flat. Cool! An excuse to go take more pictures! (like I need an excuse).
Why can't night class instructors explain it so simply...?