Nice set, but a word about colour. Nature nearly always presents colours that go together, call it natural selection because in many ways it is as we are not the only animals on the planet that perceive and react to colour in the same way.
Now a word about saturation. Saturation by contrast and the 'saturation slider' reduces the shades tints and tones because saturated colours are colours that have a narrower wavelength, a high vibrancy in relation to their brightness. Increasing the saturation of colours that are lit by diffuse light can be effective because it's difficult to go too far as the slider only slides so far, but when you do it in backlit sunlight and sunlight shots you are removing the shades, tints, and tones that go together and replacing them with single colours that don't really go together and therefore look un-natural. In a lot of your shots you are introducing, through saturation the reduced wavelengths of colours that don't go together and are not seen in nature. In your "Three Sisters of Glencoe" you are introducing a sky that's never that saturated blue, (deep-sky-blue is green and blue), and grass that's never that green, (usually far more yellow in it). To me the colours are mis-matched and frankly 'yuk'.
Again with your "To Glen Etive", the colours are never the ones portrayed by nature and thus look un-natural together. Also in increasing the brightness of the foreground and the mountains relative to the sky you have made it lighter than what is normal against the brightness of the sky. Again it has an un-natural look.
We look and see each and every day and what we look at and see has been imprinted in our brains as natural. We expect scenes to look a certain way and that is very much expressed in the relative values of contrast and colour, never underestimate this as it is closely linked to the way we see and perceive. If you mess with those relative values as you have you can end up with visual mush, which is a shame.
I know the locations of many of your shots intimately, I know the weather and how they look because I visit them regularly being only a couple of hours away, see my smugmug gallery. I'm also not against processing, but in order to push it successfully you must learn about relative values and the importance of preserving them in your image. I prefer a more natural look, which is subjective, but even so you'd be surprised by just how much some of my images have been altered. It's the preservation of relative values that makes them look believable and natural. You can equally make them surreal and believable with the same understanding.
Your telephoto shot "The Old Man Of Storr Awakens" is a stunning shot, but what's happened to the colour? Where is the yellow in the grass and the subtle shades, tints and tones as the background recedes into the mist. The 3D effect on this if you understand the receding colours that occur so naturally in nature combined with subtle tints and shades with low contrast in the softer background contrasted with the natural rich colours and higher contrast of the foreground could make this a stand out shot for life. It really could be that good.
Read this, it's short, simple, and should give you a better understanding of how we really percieve not only the world around us but also images:
Color Wheels are wrong How color vision actually works ASmartBear - WP Engine
You may think you're adding punch, but be aware most people don't like being punched.
Excuse my being honest, this is my honest criticism and is offered only as help and not meant to offend.
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/30/30987-a33ca8e90b5d786c21e59d37945b9cc6.jpg?1734159043)
