Pot of Gold

I like the colors and light. I generally find warm images more appealing and than cool ones. Overall the comp seems a bit busy and confusing, so that distracts me somewhat. Also, maybe it's the ndf's, but the bottom of the sky seems a bit dark relative to the area just above it.

Nice one, Hakon. Creative editing is fine with me. Warming up images was always done by using filters - no problem. As long as the images doesn't get messy at 100% it's a non-issue for me. Creativity shouldn't stop behind the lens - especially in digital photography.
For the shot - I like it. The tobacco-like toning looks very appealing. I'm thinking about the square shape of the water a little and I wish this were a bit more curved and harmonic. But that's minor.

Thanks Tony.
The reason for the darker sky in the middle is that the clouds are a bit more dense just there, over the middle the sun is shining through.
Any crop suggestions to make the comp a little less busy?

Thanks Andreas. Yeah, I have lots of exposures from this little pot...but this is the best one in terms of water coming into it. Oh well, I guess I have to go back.

A lot of drama and action here, Hakon! I don't mind the creative editing at all as long as it helps us express as artists.

I think your feelings on this are dead on. The sky in particular seems to be a little overworked in processing. But, I see why you are compelled to try to make it work as the comp is very engaging.

I like the composition Håkon! Particularly the foreground looks good. There is a nice repetition of shapes. Even the water mimics the lines found in the rocks which is a very interesting feature. The warm colours are appealing too. Regarding processing - really a matter of personal taste how far we want to go. Some images can take (need) some more processing, in some cases it does not "feel" right. One thing though - via photography we want to convey a scene that happened or existed for the length of the exposure. Particularly photography is about showing a specific moment that indeed existed. That's inherent in (nature) photography per se. If we go to far with processing, we are stressing the realm of fairness in my opinion, cause we are not longer showing that (decisive) moment. Color adjustments and contrast do not change that moment as such. On the other hand by adding a different sky for example or by combining different exposusures to "create" a wateraction that did not happen, that moment is altered. The moment which is shown though the photograph actually never existed. Such processing is also ok, but it should definitely be disclosed. Otherwise the viewer is fooled by the photographer. That is just my opinion.
Here I think your processing is definitely ok and not unfair.!..

Dietrich: Thank you so much for your comment! I agree with you. Although, combining two exposures is sometimes necessary. If the dynamic range is too great even when stacking all my grads, but I always take those two exposures right after each other. IMO I am not adding anything to the scene that is not there when doing so. It is more or less the same as doing it with grads.

Cheers
Håkon

Creative editing is fine with me, and I think you did a very nice job with this. There's a slight halo along the horizon line, but other than that it looks great to me. Nice work.