Give me your comments/critiques welcome. I am pretty sure every photographer who has ever been to Iceland has taken these.

Welcome any post processing advices.

[chesebert]

Yikes. My post processing advice is that you cease to do post processing until you understand what light means.

I don’t understand, please be more specific I asked the “hidden people” for better light on those days but no luck

[mattb123]

Yikes. My post processing advice is that you cease to do post processing until you understand what light means.

That seems like a mean spirited thing to say. If you see mistakes you could point them out to help the photographer improve.

As for the photos, clearly you could have had better light but you could have also had much worse! Most of the popular photos of these places are golden hour shots so those are generally going to have nicer light and color. But if this was your only chance to get these iconic scenes, you did reasonably well.
The main thing I'm not a big fan of here is the added (I assume) vignette. I don't think it adds anything and just doesn't look right to me with a landscape like this.
For the shot and light you had, I don't have much other criticism of the PP, but what do I know?

[SSGGeezer]

That seems like a mean spirited thing to say. If you see mistakes you could point them out to help the photographer improve.

As for the photos, clearly you could have had better light but you could have also had much worse! Most of the popular photos of these places are golden hour shots so those are generally going to have nicer light and color. But if this was your only chance to get these iconic scenes, you did reasonably well.
The main thing I'm not a big fan of here is the added (I assume) vignette. I don't think it adds anything and just doesn't look right to me with a landscape like this.
For the shot and light you had, I don't have much other criticism of the PP, but what do I know?

Going with Matt here and the only thing I find distracting is the vignetting. I don't like the dark edges as it looks like you had a wonky polarizing filter on it. They are not typical tourist phots so I don't know why you would say that. Lovely place and if the light is good, a landscape photographer's dream! Post without the vignette and let us see the composition as you saw it in the viewfinder.

And Matt, yes I think you do know!

[IgorZ]

I like your second photo a lot. I would keep the vignette there. You could see how cropping a bit of the right hand side of the second photo would look. I would also try to bring out the clouds a lot more. You could really create a menacing look. There are debates on whether it is appropriate to remove anything from photos, but I think it would look better without people, if you can clone them out... Or with one only to show the scale.

[oculus]

It's strange how honesty is no longer a virtue.

[SSGGeezer]

It's strange how honesty is no longer a virtue.

There is a difference between honesty and being kind of a jerk. When someone asks for a critique, that means a request for technical help in improving, not saying "don't bother, you are clueless!" Which is what you seem to be saying. After many years in the military, trust me, I know being a jerk very well!

[mattb123]

It's strange how honesty is no longer a virtue.

I think honesty is a virtue, but your comment didn't seem to offer much in the way of critique or useful advice.
Your recommendation seems very vague and just negative.

I could say "read a book about photography" as a critique or I could say something more useful, like: "the composition needs work, think about the rule of thirds" or "the light is too flat for this kind of landscape, try shooting at another time of day" or "it doesn't seem to be in focus, what were you trying to focus on?".

See the difference? What is your issue with the OP's understanding (or lack thereof) of light in relation to their post processing approach?

[chesebert]

Will fix the vignetting issue (just a quick and dirty copy/paste of past settings and adjustments in LR). Would have liked better lighting condition, but was a tour and had no choice. Golden hour or pitch dark (with northern lights in the sky) would be ideal; but you get what you can, especially when traveling with family...

[mattb123]

Shah, bro, I see the diff.

Ok, so you understand me. That's a start.
I don't think I or anyone else here understands your critique. I'm genuinely curious what you mean.

[Sandy Hancock]

Back on topic, I think the second shot is a very strong composition, although I get the impression the horizon is not level. I'm not a fan of the heavy vignetting, and the saturation and contrast have been massaged a little too hard.

The first shot is a little too homogeneous. A longer lens picking out some detail might have been better than trying to fit the whole scene in.

[chesebert]

Thanks. Will fix the horizon; but I like saturated landscape - it will look better printed and viewed under a light source, as opposed to on a monitor. On the first photo, I am thinking about delineating the waterfall and the mountain range by using different color pallets or some other method - I was going for the 3 layer composition.

Vignette was accidental....lol

In terms of the composition for the second photo, I think I saw at the airport some postcards with similar composition - what can I say, great minds think alike. /s

[chesebert]

How does this look?

Iceland by , on Flickr

[Sandy Hancock]

Better

The darkened sky is bit over the top for my tastes.

[Fcsnt54]

How does this look?

Iceland by , on Flickr

I like this second one much better, i think the halo effect around the mountain is throwing me off a little bit though. I think if you removed that halo in the sky the picture would be a home run. Either by increasing the exposure in the sky to make it even across the photo, or tried to darken that area evening out the exposure close to the mountain to remove that halo effect.