Horizon in the middle. Neither here nor there. I want to see more of the sky as the clouds promise a bit of interest.
Up High! All that grass leading up to the only point of interest - those clouds. Gives it depth? Does this look like a mountain to climb? I think it does but then I was there and it is a hill (which felt that a slippery mountain when you're climbing it in the freezing winds with inappropriate footwear).
Down low. Ah, that feels better. Open skies.
up high again but with a little bit of foreground detail (and a flare) Not too keen on this and the sloping horizon. Makes me feel like I'm about to slip over.
The horizon's nearly in the middle but having the gate and furrows in the foreground makes it much more interesting.
I found it difficult to find a relatively clear and unbroken horizon for this excercise but glad I found one in the end. I think my preference is for the horizon to be lower than middle and to show more sky, but when there is an interesting foreground object, then the focus shifts to this rather than the sky so could be more pleasing as is the case with me adn the last photograph. I think I read something about the human eye wanting to have things solid and more 'grounded' on the bottom of the pictures so this would certainly explain my preference for the above landscape to have a solid foreground but more sky. (I think it was in M freeman's book, "The Photographer's Eye" - must check this out later.)
Incidentally, I've found Michael Freeman's book an invaluable partner to the course materials as it appears to follow the same format and of course it is written by the same author! I am trying to not read the book too far in advance though, as I want to complete the excercises and make notes of my initial findings, then read more around it.
