In many respects they are quite similar, but there are major differences in the main objects that has a dramatic visual impact on the audiences interpretation of space and shape. The bulkier, cement images give the first image more weight, while the second image has smaller details which gives it a lighter feel.
The composition of both images are incredibly brave. You’ve captured a very wide geographic space in both cases and yet, you’ve managed to simplify the image through the strategic use of lines, color, depth and shape.
Both images have the perspective of standing on a cliff and looking out into the beautiful vista. The first image however, showcases the beauty of a city, while the second highlights the beauty of nature.
Another major difference is the color palettes you’ve chosen for both of these images. The first is made up of gradients of grey and blue, while the second image is predominantly made up of a slightly more dramatic blue and green.
The only element of both photographs I want you to keep your eye on is how you place the horizon line in your photographs. It’s photographer’s intuition that tells them to put the horizon line in the center and the main object in the middle. However, if you feel comfortable breaking this rule, you’ll likely start to feel more confident with your compositions. As a general rule of thumb, the more interesting layer should take up the bottom 2/3rds while the less interesting element (dead or negative space – in this case the sky) could take up the top 1/3rd. However, rules are meant to be broken, so if the symmetry of a centered horizon line is what you wanted, then great. Alternatively if you wanted to put the sky in the top 2/3rds and the land in the bottom 1/3rd, then that’s great too. It’s just important to be aware of the rules before you start breaking them.