Jeroen, about your rejected image:

With 'impact', I think what they mean is that they have seen this type of image before and that it adds nothing significantly new. These guys are tough; you have to surprise them or slap them in the face with an unexpected twist or with an emotionally captivating image (eg. the addition of a lonely creature or some other 'curiosity'). There are probably a lot of similar misty images on 1x already; some not even as good as this one. But they may think that this was just one too many ;o)

With 'composition' they probably mean that it's a fairly straightforward compo; they want something challenging that makes them say: "now why didn't I think of that before?" They also want the composition to tell a story... leading the viewer's eyes to the emotional focus point. To be honest, I don't exactly know where I am supposed to look here... The composition needs to largely support what you want to convey with the image. Probably they found that was not the case here, or they didn't see it ;o))

With 'exposure' they meant that the image doesn't make use of all the possibilities that were at hand. The image goes from dark to light in a very 'linear' kind of way. You took the shot in the direction of the sun, which means that you see no direct light on the objects in the scene; you see only the shadowed side. The foreground is very dark; maybe it would have been a nice addition to light up that fallen tree with a fill-in flash, that would even have provided an excellent resting point and an interesting 'emotional focal point'. Maybe you will say that you wanted to show the scene like it really was, but think of this: as an image maker, it's you that makes the image, according to what you want to say or show. You can use what you see as a starting point, and use what you know and can do to make it stronger. Especially where exposure is concerned.

Just my two eurocents ;o)
Geert

We do not see things as they are. ǝɹɐ ǝʍ sɐ sƃuıɥʇ ǝǝs ǝʍ