Why?

I like them both although I favor this one as it is brighter and l especially like the land flowing down to the property - great eye catcher and pointer.  One thing stands our in both of them, the barn appears to my eye to be out or proportion as it relates to the height - and I know this is one thing you do intentionally.  Perhaps an open hay bale door with pully above it, in the upper portion of the barn would tame down the height???  HOWEVER - (I love that word). I give it 5 stars.  and I think we should come up with some additionl lyrics for RE-RE-DO-DO and develop a song.

Since you are comparing,  I think the first one gives more attention to the structures  .In this one, the busy foreground distracts from them

I have to agree with Jan, I liked the blue green wash in the earlier painitng.  I do like the sky in this painting, the other seemed to be too heavy.  The direction of light in this painting loses the great shadows in the first painitng.

Alright Ladies! I completely agree. The first one is better.

First one is too dark - this one has a lot more LIFE to it.  The FG is wonderful - my only distraction is the height of the barn.

The FG directs the viewer to the structures - pointers are a very important factor for directional control of the viewer.

If a viewers eyes wander around aimlessly, they move onto the next painting (THIS IS WHAT A BARRIER (FENCE ETC:)DOES!!!)  I just had to say it again!

The second one is too light! The barn has lost its charm and the man is focal.I liked the first one because of the richness of color!

ie. the ochre house.The second is nice, and the bright light is charming but, it is a totally

different scene. In the first painting, the man is not such an outstanding feature (which I find a good thing).The second painting drags you to the man and forces you to look at him!

Which I find distracting to the over all painting.It takes away from the beautiful landscape!

And, while I am at it, OP,

1). there should not be standing water in the field as the run off would not allow it due to the steep incline.

2). The shadows of the barn is long  but, the sun is high..this is confusing because the sun on the roof looks like noon time.

3). the softness of the meadow is gone, I liked that effect.

4). I miss the lavender backdrop of trees on the far shore.

Kells invest in a new crt for you computer - yours is certainly defective - or you are looking through rose colored glasses.

Where is the standing water?????

This is clearly the more vibrant and moving painting - in my opinion - can't understand what you are looking at.  I also think you have your shadows mixed up as well.

O.K. now we can see the problem. Richard, can you not see the reflected water in the foreground?That red is reflected off water!!!! That large 'V' is the barn reflected in water also!

Can you not see that the barn has an extremely long shadow on the ground?

My shadows are not mixed up. I am unable to determine the time of day in this painting, it is confusing. The cupola on the barn has a shorter shadow than the barn is showing on the ground.

You have a right to your opinion regarding the vibrancy.

I feel differently and I do not wear rose colored glasses!

Don't try to view everything so literally! It's red in the dirt cause the painting needed a little red down there to carry the color. My paintings are just a bunch of colors, shapes, design and values arranged in what I hope is a pleasing way. They are symbols, not reality. Any feeling that this or any of my paintings are a realistic representation of the real image should blink twice and look out the window.

Sorry, OP but I can only report what I see. If you wanted red somewhere, you got reflected puddle light.Otherwise, each person has his / her own vision. You are the artist and creator of the piece. If you say it is just color splash, then, it is just color splash.Adios.

No I don't see reflected water in the foreground - I see a slope of land going down towards the buildings - this slope of land has a lot of LOCAL COLOR on it (I can explain that term Kells if needed).  This is a painting, not a photograph or a tight-as-ed oil or pastel -it is a fun painting, a loose fluid watercolor.  When your disposition improves, let me know.  I can only report what I see and of course like you I'm entitled to my opinion.  We may use different terms and like different things, but loosen up Old Boy - life is too short.  

Ten four, RIchard. I am in agreement...it is getting shorter too!

But, since I am more of a tight-as oil painter, I bow to both of youse guys' expert teese with loose-as-ed watercolors.

Richard and Kells - Tomorrow at sunrise, you select your weapons, watercolor brush or palette knife

With my luck he would tickle me to death with his brushes!  This is just friendly banter.

Yes, I know

V Peace. The good thing is that the creator creates but the viewer interprets. Hear the calm?

Trivia: the use of two fingers in the air actually meant that the Archers returned home with their bow fingers!(the enemy chopped them off to keep them from being able to fire an arrow!)

Today it is an international signal for peace!

Calmness is sweet~

Thanks for that trivia. Good thing I sold my bow!

I'm exhausted after discussing this painting - please don't do a 3rd one - I'm too old for this

This painting is beautiful... it has quite a wimsical quality to it.    It is a pleasure to view.

The only problem I have with this painting is the horizon line is too high.

It's a minor distraction. Otherwise an outstanding work.

I agree with GillEhlers - Whimsical - what fun!  :)

Oh, don't stop now, this spat is getting good!

Love the painting - it is fresh and whimsical  :)

What a joyous painting, looks like you had fun with this redo.