Hi all, thanks for the comments. Firstly, i am a tourist. I fly 8,500 miles to a foreign land not to get landscapes but to photograph animals. I had four days spare so as a tourist, what am i going to take pictures of? Memories. I drove to the various places i could to get shots i can never get at home, for use at home. Yes if i lived their, had lots of time, could go back again and again i would get more/better stuff but as i cant, i took memories. That said i think they are good memories as good as many worse than others.
I flew 8500 miles in two planes, stayed in motels, drove 1500 miles walked across deserts alone with no mobile for 90 minutes in %85 heat no one around, or climed down 1000 ft drop cliffs one slip and i was dead. The planning took a year and i had four days to get some landscapes before i drove north for the animals. Some were so easy like Mesa Arch but taken at a very different angle, some very difficult like the Kiva. I went through a lot to get some of the pics. Yes i can do the lone twig in the desert, the old person with a wrinkle in his face from India the arty shapes in a rock and maybe if i ever go back i will but i didnt have the time and wanted memories. I take motorcycle racing shots mainly, this was a break from my day job.
When i first went to Paris as an example i did the "big stuff" like the Eiffel Tower then when i went back i spent three days taking pictures of the homeless beggars. When i go again ill do other stuff. Thats what we tourists do big stuff first, arty stuff later. Its developing your local knowledge to improve your photography. Remember, i dont have the advantage of staying in places for weeks, having a studio or anything like that. Im a tourist. As for the pictures being a over processed thats not fair. Ill post you two files unadjusted in RAW. The Kiva has had no post RAW adjustments, you can even see the dirt in the sky and its the color version. I found a Bryce picture that has had a levels adjustment on the bottom as it was impossible to get the exposure correct due to the sun and three stop Lee filter. I think it was approx half a stop underexposed to get the sky having no blown pixels. No colours, no contrast no sharpen nothing otherwise. Even the dirt on the sensor is included. I agree though Utah colors do look very vibrant. That said if mine were half as good as Tom Till in Moab id be a very happy tourist. Actually, i was.