I'd say it very nearly works. You've definitely isolated the ice, but we need to see a bit more of the river. From your description, that would have been difficult to achieve.
I like it. It's a very nice abstract composition but I'm not sure where my eye is supposed to go. I might suggest the opposite of Kevin and see less river. Perhaps crop square a little bottom (the one blade of grass and the unsharp stone bothers me a bit) and left (I see too much black), then increase contrast some to see the wetness of the ice glow more. Perhaps that not your intent however...
Best regards,
James
Thanks for your comments. I was actually trying to make the ice stand our and glow. The problem that I saw when I tried to crop the lower part (horizontal grass and rocks) is that I felt the ice lost context somehow. I wanted to show it clearly against the very dark background of the river.
I love it actually. But itwould look very nice as a square...maybe a wee bit off the left... so there you have everything! Different people...different tastes!
Perhaps you could bring *everything* up a bit. For the ice to really pop, the specular-ish highlights probably need to be really white, and the black area may be a bit too black. So if everything came up a bit, you might achieve what you are seeking. I think it has great potential.
Looks like the actual print has enough detail in the river to be recognizable. I'd burn down the bottom right corner, and the upper right corner - and the lower left corner too. Just bring all that non-crucial information down a zone or two. I like the cropping - compostion. But I think burning down those areas might draw the eye into the ice more. And I think your basic contrast and exposure are fine.