Sue Falls and Cedar Creek

[Rainforest]

After twenty years of hiking this area I found a new waterfall last year. It's rather small and hard to find and it is now named after me ;-). The second one is on the same creek and is unnamed but well known and slippery as ever to try and shoot. Both shots are from last fall - just now trying out some PP. I look forward to your thoughts.

1. Sue Falls


2. Cedar Creek

[Shadowman]

Nicely done.

[bje07]

I like the huge DoF that makes the leaves as well as the BG in focus.

[Mike Buckley]

Both exposures and compositions work really well. The leaf in the first photo's lower right corner is so nicely placed that I wonder if you put it there. If so, great thinking! The white balance of the second photo looks a just a little blue on my calibrated monitor.

[rpcrowe]

Very nice - both of them!

[IzzieK]

Susan, I am not really a fan of slow shutter speed to the point of milkiness. I kinda like the second one as it shows more of the natural movement of the water. It is an action shot without getting too much of the slow shutter speed like the first one. The first one is a nice composition but I didn't like the water treatment.

[John 2]

Nicely done in both cases. Agree with Mike on the slight blueness of the second but the shutter speed is bang on for me. The water has a nice texture.

[Rainforest]

Both exposures and compositions work really well. The leaf in the first photo's lower right corner is so nicely placed that I wonder if you put it there. If so, great thinking! The white balance of the second photo looks a just a little blue on my calibrated monitor.

Thanks Mike. The leaf was there but I scooched it over ;-). It may be slightly blue - the rocks are quite blue and green naturally. I toned the color down on some of them to look more "natural".

[Rainforest]

I like the huge DoF that makes the leaves as well as the BG in focus.

Thanks John and Jean I appreciate your review.

[Rainforest]

Nicely done in both cases. Agree with Mike on the slight blueness of the second but the shutter speed is bang on for me. The water has a nice texture.

Susan, I am not really a fan of slow shutter speed to the point of milkiness. I kinda like the second one as it shows more of the natural movement of the water. It is an action shot without getting too much of the slow shutter speed like the first one. The first one is a nice composition but I didn't like the water treatment.

Not everyone's cup of tea regarding the slow shutter - not my preference either but it was the best shot overall this time out. Thanks for your comments as always. Happily I can go back and shoot it again
Thanks John. :-)

[Manfred M]

I definitely like the first image more than the second and the maple leaf lying there breaking up the expanse of green really does the trick. The flowing water works and for the most part you have preserved texture in the water and that is important. For these types of shots, I generally shoot from a tripod and do a wide bracket in the exposure so that I can decide which level of texture works best for me. I will make my final call when I open it up on the large computer screen. I will sometimes blend different exposures by hand to get the textures into places that I want.

The second seems to be a bit soft in the mid ground and back ground and does not work as well for me.

Smoothing water is certainly something that people have varied opinions on. I tend to take a more nuanced view - if the image works, then it was the right decision. If it does not or at least those camera settings did not work out as well as might have been hoped for.

[Mike Buckley]

Not everyone's cup of tea regarding the slow shutter - not my preference either

I'm confused that the shutter speed isn't your preference. You presumably had the camera set up on a tripod. Was there a particular reason you didn't take multiple shots at various shutter speeds, quickly check their effect in the camera's LCD to make sure you had captured a variety of water displays, and then determine your favorite when you were back home working with your computer monitor?

[bnnrcn]

Nice images Susan If your WB choice deliberate then there is no need to change it. But if those images were mine I would warm them up a bit.

[Rainforest]

I'm confused that the shutter speed isn't your preference. You presumably had the camera set up on a tripod. Was there a particular reason you didn't take multiple shots at various shutter speeds, quickly check their effect in the camera's LCD to make sure you had captured a variety of water displays, and then determine your favorite when you were back home working with your computer monitor?

Oh yes, multiple shots at various speeds... It was a hurry up shoot. On this particular stop I recall having a somewhat impatient husband waiting in the car after a long afternoon of mushoroom picking and a considerable ride home ahead. It really boiled down to working too fast. I moved my tripod for different angles on a rock ledge that is about 4 feet square and likely didn't run through all my options with each effort. That's my story for this outing :-)

[Mike Buckley]

Understandable, Susan. My wife has a very impatient husband, too.

[Rainforest]

I definitely like the first image more than the second and the maple leaf lying there breaking up the expanse of green really does the trick. The flowing water works and for the most part you have preserved texture in the water and that is important. For these types of shots, I generally shoot from a tripod and do a wide bracket in the exposure so that I can decide which level of texture works best for me. I will make my final call when I open it up on the large computer screen. I will sometimes blend different exposures by hand to get the textures into places that I want.

The second seems to be a bit soft in the mid ground and back ground and does not work as well for me.

Smoothing water is certainly something that people have varied opinions on. I tend to take a more nuanced view - if the image works, then it was the right decision. If it does not or at least those camera settings did not work out as well as might have been hoped for.

Thanks for your good eye. You are correct about the second shot being a wee bit soft - I worked that over. The texture in the water in the first shot was something I also paid attention to and was pretty pleased with the outcome though I usually prefer it less smooth - each shot even at the same settings often differ widely. I cloned out a rather large log in the upper left side on the first shot just to see if I could and it's solid I think. Anyway as I wrote below to Mike this was a bit of a hurry up and shoot shoot. Thanks again!

[Rainforest]

Nice images Susan If your WB choice deliberate then there is no need to change it. But if those images were mine I would warm them up a bit.

Binnur, it's always so good to get these comments and to be able to go back and look anew. The first is a definite choice the second one is definitely worth a second look - I fiddled with it a lot trying to get it just right and probably finally got tired. ;-)

[Rainforest]

Susan, I am not really a fan of slow shutter speed to the point of milkiness. I kinda like the second one as it shows more of the natural movement of the water. It is an action shot without getting too much of the slow shutter speed like the first one. The first one is a nice composition but I didn't like the water treatment.

Thanks Izzey - it's always good to get feedback whichever way it goes :-)

[Rainforest]

Very nice - both of them!

I'm working my way backwards in this post ! Thanks Richard glad you enjoyed the peek.

[Rainforest]

Thanks John!