Which is better

[arith]

Person or no person? Unfortunately I can't remember the original method of processing so imagine they are the same apart from the person.

_MG_3875Fountain by Stephen Davis, on Flickr

_MG_3876FountainPerson copy by Stephen Davis, on Flickr

[Manfred M]

Ask yourself - does the person add to the image? If the answer is yes, then he should stay. If no, then he should not be there.

Hint: In the vast majority of images - showing the backs of people does not add to the image.

[arith]

I was thinking he might add by showing scale Manfred, otherwise it has to be a person looking in the direction of the lens. I might try do the first like the second though. Cheers Manfred.

[Manfred M]

I was thinking he might add by showing scale Manfred, otherwise it has to be a person looking in the direction of the lens. I might try do the first like the second though. Cheers Manfred.

That might be the case, but then he must be an integral piece of the image rather than some random person in the image.

[Wavelength]

i think the real problem is the second person sitting there, which makes it a random shot. If it were a single person watching, things would have been better; the clouds have more details in the second

[arith]

This is harder than it looks isn't it. Anyway hopefully got it right in the end.

_MG_3875FountainAttemptii by Stephen Davis, on Flickr

[Geoff F]

For me, Steve, one person would have been OK but that second person who is partially hidden just causes confusion.

[arith]

Cheers Geoff, he was fixated on the fountain but.... this fountain is sometimes extraordinary, it is small at the moment. I noticed it at its most aggressive a day before, on my way back from Karlskurche.

[IzzieK]

I would like to say, clone the other people out to keep in line with your title/question but you mentioned once that you are not that good with cloning yet (or pp) so I will just zip it for now...Honestly I like #2 with the person...
Cheers.