I don't know that "too far" or "not far enough" are the questions to be asked. For me, I see two distinct areas: two-thirds of the lower half with plenty of detail and everything else lacking in detail. If that's what you intended and if you like it, go for it. If not (and I suspect that most people would not like it), change it to meet whatever you have in mind.
I agree with Mike. IMHO this pic loses me. What I first thought was a high key area now appears to be snow. Are you trying to emphasize the picnic area and/or the snow(?)? It appears that your subject was the picnic area; however your supporting elements unwittingly became the focal point when viewing this pic.
Please feel free to correct me if I missed the boat entirely.
Bruce
Always difficult to decide if a photo has been over processed without seeing the original.
There does, however, seem to be a rather large area containing very little. Would a different crop reduce that area and concentrate more on the 'main subject'?
Hi Jon. Hope you are well.
I would agree with the others that this is a shot of 'two halves'. The ethereal Hi Key of the upper area ...delicate tracery of branches and then the rather contrasting solid nature of the middle.
If the top of the roof were more defined then it might balance a little better but I think you know this doesn't quite work.
( I just did some 'Hi-key' work myself and it is incredibly difficult to get the balance between light and definition right. I hope you will try some more subjects and I look forward to seeing them!)
Mike, Bruce, Geoff & Sharon, Thank you all for your feedback. The original shot had more definition in the roof but this is closer to how it appeared to me when I was standing there. Very strong sunlight kinda washing out the roofline with detail underneath it. When I get home this weekend I may play with the original some to see what else I can get out of it...or I may just move on to some of the other 1400 shots that I have left to process from the weekend
Cheers