john, great idea! i followed along and it works pretty good, really good actually. with some more experimentation i'm sure i could get it right. i like how it throws different lightness values across that area (i used a pretty high motion blur). as far as more experimentation, i think i'd have to play around blending the edges of the foliage as they are pretty blue in highlights. in B&W the edges are less disturbing, but still somewhat. and when you mention printing a larger size, i still think it's probably not going to be 'right'.
i just got done curing the color print of the zoomed in image, 12x18. i think at this size this wider version would just be too distracting. i really like the print of the zoomed in version both color and B&W (which is still curing). for the B&W, i did two copies, one with R2400 set at advanced B&W with a warm tone, another with the warm tone but set to 'normal' instead of 'darker'. i dodged the left tree trunk in it's darkest areas to bring out some tones and it really did the trick.
i think for a wider, i'm going to have to try the shot again and get a different angle or just plain go for the super HDR with two images and blend the two layers together. i don't think the wide angle would look bad, B&W even if the top of the image were very dark, blending to a 'good exposure' in the middle, then down to the darker ground with perhaps some blown out reflections in the water.
i think i'm finally on to something, that is to say finally thinking right about making photos. i said it once before and i still can't think of anyth better advice - it's best to get it right i think that while i like the zoomed in image, getting the wider angle better would be a hit out of the park for me.
everyone's ideas have helped me understand more what a 'right' shot would be. i'm going to have to wait until next week before i get up to where i shot this.