The difference is subtle with the filter, but I have learnt what a big difference that subtle change can make. I have owned a polarising filter for 2 years – bought at the same time as my camera – and only now do I see what the true value is for the ordinary scene and not only the spectacular stuff![attachment=1:dgm8wdpa]No Filter.jpg[/attachment:dgm8wdpa][attachment=0:dgm8wdpa]Circiular Polariser Filter.jpg[/attachment:dgm8wdpa]
I like the non-obvious use of the polarizing filter. Although you have an obvious use for it in your photograph to help exaggerate the blue in the sky, it’s also had a subtle impact on the overall coloring of your photograph.
There are many mentionable components to this photograph. For starters, the line created by the trail acts a great leading line that helps guide the viewer’s eye into the photograph. One thing you might want to experiment with to create a more interesting sense of balance is making the leading line come in from one of the bottom corners. Although your not perfectly center, your line doesn’t come from one obvious corner either. Experiment by changing your position and making that line either come from the bottom right or the bottom left. It will give the photograph a more unbalanced and dramatic look.
The other thing to be careful about is you amputation of secondary object. I like the right wall of the non-polarized filter photograph a little more because you have a cleaner composition on the right wall. In our polarized photograph you have half of the top of a tree cut off by the right wall of the photograph. I like the overall composition of your polarized shot better because I liked seeing more the sky, but the right wall is a little distracting for me.