Trees at the top of a mountain in the Ecuadorian Andes, seen when the clouds parted for a few seconds.
This was a very windy day, which meant I had to shoot this panorama of five pictures handheld. I also had to manually stitch them, as the clouds moved too much in between the pictures for them to be automatically assembled in Photoshop, so I had to line them up and heal/clone every discrepancy.
These are the reasons why I'm a bit on the fence regarding this photo : I quite like this sort of minimalistic landscape, the imbalance of it and the mood it conveys, but I'm not sure if the "complexity" of the work needed for it to be where it is now makes me more attached to it. I tend to believe that you shouldn't use a story as a crutch for a badly-taken picture and I'd like to know if that's what I'm doing now.
EXIF : Canon 7DII, ISO 100, 100mm, 1/250s, f/8.
You did this the hard way, Rémi! Since you used a 100mm lens, I'm not sure what you've gained over using a wide-angle, and perhaps cropping. I assume you shot in portrait format. With no overlap on your 100mm images, your final image would be about 65 degrees wide, almost exactly equivalent to a 28mm landscape image, easily attained if you had your 24-70 with you. To me, this image does lack a little coherency, and looks like a rather literal shot of a fairly "flat" scene in terms of light.
I hesitate to be so critical, but I know what you have achieved in other images, which can have much more "feel" for me. Others may disagree, of course, in their response to this one. I certainly wouldn't call it a "badly-taken picture", and I like its relatively minimalist nature.