Thank you, I was testing the retrostyle LUT in-camera and wanted to see how the picture looks ooc. But you're right, for such high contrast scenes it doesn't seem to be the best one.
For landscape you want RAW and unfortunately it takes PP, it's a long learning curve as other photography elements are like compositions.
LUTs are the current trendy talk but you can choose jpeg + RAW, I have tried this since yesteryear but now don't bother to keep image count down. If I take 100 on a landscaoe session I am annoyed because that means I was snapping and not fully paying attention to narrowing it down to better stuff. Usually I only take 30 or so like using expensive film, sometimes 10, sometimes zero as the light is not good. It is good practice to do this as when you are experienced you know not to waste your time as you can judge by your eyes.
The landscape wide angle myth, I'll not get into that here and that is for an entirely different thread as I've too much to say... But basically the noob landscaper making everything too small and including mostly irrelevant image which doesn't add anything to the photograph and usually no cropping out such image going with the native 3:2 format which we see everywhere.
As with any image you finalise it is a good question to ask yourself "would I pay £30 or so for a pro lab print and hang it on my wall or even post it on a forum?".
I got canvas prints done shortly after starting DSLR photography in 2012, they were landscapes with noob qualities so after a while I ripped them up and binned them
At the time I thought they were good LoL
That is not saying I would print that last photo I posted, it's crap/mediocre but will do for a post. No way is that a wall hanger LoL
If you truly got 10 awe inspiring photos in a lifetime you'd be doing well
