Which version do you prefer?

[outwithmycamera]

Been playing with these two approaches to the same view, wondering which people tend to prefer, all other things being equal. Both are uncropped, taken with slightly different framing.

Version 1:


Version 2:

[dje]

Hi Chris

The first composition works best for me, by far. Nice shot. I would back the blue saturation off somewhat but that's just my taste.

Dave

[NorthernFocus]

I prefer the second version for the offset horizon and overall not as bright. One/one

[Shadowman]

The first for me as there is more to intrigue the eye beyond the land mass.

[Dave A]

First one is my preference.

Dave

[dem]

Another vote for #1. It feels more balanced somehow. I guess intuitively I expect the sky to be "bigger" than the lake and the land mass to be low in the image, not high.

If version #2 had a duck or something else in the foreground, it would probably work fine.

[Dave Humphries]

Version one for me too, as Dem says, the foreground doesn't really have anything in it that warrants so much of it.

[bnnrcn]

#1 for me

[Wavelength]

Definitely #1
#2 has too much negative space in foreground

[IzzieK]

I am a fan of the first one, too...I think the inclusion of the sky is nice here, compared to #2, the bottom one has more water which to me, does not contribute to the scene at all. Just my opinion...

[outwithmycamera]

Thanks everyone for your input, i'm generally a fan of big skies so that is where I was leaning also. I do like the 'negative space' as Nadakumar calls it in the second one but I think the first is the better of the two.