Terraces at Portes

James, I would suggest studying the photography of other landscape photographers. I would suggest the photography of John Wimberley, Paula Chamlee, John Sexton, Bruce Barnbaum, and Ansel Adams among some of those that do nice work. Wimberley, Barnbaum, Chamlee, and Sexton have websites to the best of my knowledge.

Study what they do insofar as placements, edges, corners, use of near/far relationships, leading lines, patterns, textures, vanishing points, variance of tonal relationships and spatial relationships.

By the way I do like this image that you have posted..it is very subtle but effective.

g'day black,
i must agree with Donald, study other images and distill what makes them succesful

this is a great scene, but your capture is not 'special'

Thanks to you both. Sometimes I don't spend enough time doing that-- looking at others work.
I'm not sure what you mean by not special...but I'll give this one another go at printing and see what I come up with.

I'll have a crack at the "not special" comment. I think the scene lacks what I call an "exclamation point". I don't mean necessarily a cheap "wow factor" which can fade with repeated viewing but a thoughtful and powerful arrangement of the elements of the scene which make it "special".
This scene has potential as you have have four broad layers:
1. the lighter foreground
2. the darker middle ground which has potential for interesting contrast in the image
3. the line of the hill
4. the sea and sky (washed out)
The "problem" is they are four broad swathes all of approximately equal weight which leads to a kind of blandness in the final image. There is not enough tension and resolution in the composition. As Donald says studying other work you like and even putting one of your prints side by side and looking at the difference particularly in construction of the elements can help. I hope being a bit more specific has helped. Ray may have meant something completely different but this is my analysis!
Keep at it!
Tony

well put Tony,
James, i kind of meant the same, the image is ok and the subject has great potential, but as presented here, this image doesn't have the (possibly indefinable) 'something' that makes some works special

anybody can photograph a (insert subject) but how come (insert artist)'s work is better/wower/more memorable/nicer/subtler/more creative/more attuned/etc/etc?

is 'it' the lighting, the perspective, the timing, the choice of materials or equipment, the ????

this may or may not help, but then good imaging is not easy, and there are no secret formulas

Hi Tony and Ray,
Thanks to you both for taking the time to explain and crticize constructively my photo. Back to the books and the darkroom to give 'er another try!
Best regards,
James