Bill,
It is tough to provide C&C on 36 images, but I'll give it a shot. In the future you might want to pick 1 or 2 and ask for solid C&C on them. That will get you some specific info vs. general info.
With the first group of 24 shots I think you did a good job trying to cut down on the amount of sky in the photos. Without dramatic light in the sky, it can be tough to get a dramatic scenic vista shot. Photos are made from light and lighting can be what makes or breaks the photo.
This shot has the potential for some good sky. I think a Graduated Neutral Density (GND) filter could have helped you here. There are some GND threads in this forum.
You did a nice job of removing the sky in shots like
this one.
It is tough to combine hiking and photography. Some of the best photos can be taken during the dramatic hours of early and late light. Most hiking with views often occurs mid day, so it is tough to get dramatic light. You really have to work for it. While looking at the first 24 I was hoping that you shot some "intimate landscapes". Going on to 25-36, I found that you did.
I like the trail shots in those, but I think they could have been more effective had you removed teh sky entirely and concentrated on just the trail.
Nice job blurring the water on the brook shots. Again though you see the problem with less than perfect lighting. You did a good job of balancing the exposure, but IMO those type of shots look better shot on a cloudy day. An overcast sky will provide even lighting on a scene like that and allow you to capture more detail.
The ones with the bridge are nice. Good job with balancing the exposure for those conditions. IMO the first one has too much empty water in the foreground and the second one has too much trees up top. You have a lot of pixels to play with. Don't be afraid to go in there and crop the photo down.
Using a fixed lens forces you to make composition decisions. By removing bland sky from landscapes etc. it looks like your compositions are improving. Keep it up.
- darren