Sticky Snow II

[w7xman]

Thanks all for your thoughts from my last shot in this series. This will be two of three...

This one I am quite unsure about. I really like Jackson Falls as a subject, but really couldn't get a good perspective on them this morning IMO.

I want to like the image, and spend a good deal of time composing, and subsequently cropping and working, but something about this comp doesn't sit right with me. Perhaps it's the centered tree, perhaps the sloping line of trees. Just not sure. I think it grabs you imediately, than lets you go...

I'm curious as to your thoughts and impressions...

Canon 20D w/ Sigma 18-200
1/2 @F 16
ISO 100
Polarizer
1 Stop GND over the sky

 

[kmorgan]

Nice picture. My only change is to use Shadows/Highlights at 50/50 to darken the sky and bring out more detail in the snow and trees.



Kevin

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Well Jim, it is a nice subject, as always. My initial thoughts include:

I like Kevin's adjustment to bring out the detail in the snow.

It looks like two photographs stuck one atop the other. In other words, the trees and the falls both want to be the subject, and you can't really look at both at the same time.

You might play with cropping the top or the bottom so that one or the other becomes the (stronger) subject and see how you like that. I started with your image, but would still apply Kevin's change to the snow on the lower-left of the bottom crop.






Tim

 

[w7xman]

Well Jim, it is a nice subject, as always. My initial thoughts include:

I like Kevin's adjustment to bring out the detail in the snow.

It looks like two photographs stuck one atop the other. In other words, the trees and the falls both want to be the subject, and you can't really look at both at the same time.

You might play with cropping the top or the bottom so that one or the other becomes the (stronger) subject and see how you like that. I started with your image, but would still apply Kevin's change to the snow on the lower-left of the bottom crop.

Tim

Completely agree with you, perhaps that's why I have been struggling with this image!

 

[Grumpy]

I really, really like that subtle bit of glowing color in the treetop at the upper right part of the frame. That and the tinge of color in the clouds says ”morning.”

Your comment about the photo, “I think it grabs you immediately, then lets you go...” is an excellent observation. One of the problems here is that in the end I’m not sure what the subject is – is it the falls, or the trees and sky? Both are important elements, but the approximately equal weight of both in the frame has my focus bouncing around, and eventually out.

So, as usual I played with some cropping to see what might happen.

Getting rid of the trees and sky left me with a nice, but rather so-so waterfall photo without any special excitement.

Then, I tried cropping from the bottom, so the far bank of the stream lands about a third of the way from the bottom. This produced a nearly square picture – the dimensions, I think, were like 8.58W x 8.85H, or almost imperceptibly vertical. This did the trick for me, leaving in what I regard as the best rendition of the cascading water, along with the snow-laden trees and the nice morning sky that make the picture say "morning."

I wouldn’t play too much with tonal adjustments on this one. Things seem about right to my eye.

Try it and see what you think.

G.

 

[Halite]

I couldn't see your original image, but can see Kmorgan's edit. I really like this composition. The water flowing toward the camera is strong and draws the eye into the picture. The sloping line of trees isn't bothersome--in fact, it balances the strong diagonal of the waterfall moving in the other direction.

The transition on the neutral density filter is too readily apparent and unfortunately makes the sky look artificial.

 

[w7xman]

I couldn't see your original image, but can see Kmorgan's edit. I really like this composition. The water flowing toward the camera is strong and draws the eye into the picture. The sloping line of trees isn't bothersome--in fact, it balances the strong diagonal of the waterfall moving in the other direction.

The transition on the neutral density filter is too readily apparent and unfortunately makes the sky look artificial.

I reposted the origional dead link. I would be curious if the origional has heavy handed skies in your opinion as well...

Kmorgan, I like the changes to the foreground, but agree the skies are too much there, I may mask something if I put this through shadow/highlight treatment!

Thanks!

 

[DougPaul]

Just a comment on the long exposure with respect to the moving water--it is ok in the upper left, but just looks out of focus (to me) in the lower right.

Caveat: as I have noted previously, time blurred moving water often doesn't appeal to me. (Just my opinion--YMMV.)

Generally I agree, this image doesn't quite make it for me either. Not quite sure why.

BTW, I am also unable to see the original--these comments are based upon kmorgan's version.

Doug

edit: I can see the new link to the original image.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I'm definitely preferring my top crop, where the lower part of the falls are removed. Like DougPaul, I am not (usually) a fan of time-blurred water, but in the top crop, it's not too strong, while the bottom one definitely is too strong for my tastes.

(I agree with Grumpy about the morning light...)

Tim

 

[Halite]

Well Jim, it is a nice subject, as always. My initial thoughts include:

I like Kevin's adjustment to bring out the detail in the snow.

It looks like two photographs stuck one atop the other. In other words, the trees and the falls both want to be the subject, and you can't really look at both at the same time.

You might play with cropping the top or the bottom so that one or the other becomes the (stronger) subject and see how you like that. I started with your image, but would still apply Kevin's change to the snow on the lower-left of the bottom crop.






Tim

It's funny how different eyes see things differently. I really like the tension between the trees and waterfall. The sense of movement in the blurred water contrasted against the solid stillness of the snow covered trees is one of the strengths of this photo.

w7xman, the neutral density transition in the original is subtle and not bothersome. I'd definitely mask the top of the sky with a gradient before I did any adjustments to that portion of the picture.