Waterfalls after a storm. 2 shots

[Chri5]

I am not to sure about these shots. I seem to struggle to get that clean polished look to my images. Please feel free to criticise my shots. If there is anything you think I can improve on feel free to say it, Don't hold back I know my compositions need a little work but I think its just because I am a little bit rusty and that will come in time.

[selig1656]

Nice pics and seems like you got that shutter speed down darn good.

[vaez]

i am an amateur in the image move water well documented.
I prefer the second image need a little bit of editing the picture is crooked .
It would be better if it had more depth of field

[Chri5]

Thanks Selig1656,

Thanks Vaez

i am an amateur in the image move water well documented.
I prefer the second image need a little bit of editing the picture is crooked .
It would be better if it had more depth of field

When you say more depth of field do you mean sharper? I have been having trouble with my sharpness ever since I started taking photography seriously again. I cant figure it out. I have a really good tripod and camera but still I cant achieve good sharpness. I have read the sharpness tutorial but I still cant make head nor tail of it

[klpurkett]

I like these shots.... I love waterfalls, though I haven't had many chances to take pictures of them yet. Just a couple thoughts I had:

The big rock in the foreground seems to me to dominate the scene in both shots. I wonder if cropping about half of that rock off the bottom would help draw the eye to the falls instead of the big rock? Just a thought. Also, the yellow streaks in the water are probably just from contaminants from the storm, but I find them distracting. I'd hate to loose the greens on the rocks, but converting it to black and white would reduce the "why's the water yellow?" distraction. Maybe someone with more experience would be able to tell you how to whiten the water without changing the rest of the image...

Thanks for posting these!

[joebranko]

I like these shots, and agree with the comment about the rocks dominating the shot Perhaps cropping from the bottom and the right hand side? I love the silky effect of the long exposure, however if it were my shot I would have opted for slightly less of the silkiness which might have given some sharpness to the water? Just my opinion and I am no expert!

[Stagecoach]

I have been having trouble with my sharpness ever since I started taking photography seriously again. I cant figure it out.

Chris,

Good compositions.

Regarding the sharpness, at 10mm you should be able to use a wider aperture nearer to the 'sweet spot' of your lens and maintain adequate DoF. The reduction of speed should still give you adequate water smoothing, in fact adding a little bit more detail into it.

Posted at this small resolution it's difficult to appreciate the 'sharpness' aspect of the image, how about you post it at 1300 or 1400px width? Which lens are you using?

[Rebel]

Nice images Chris, if I'm nitpicking I would of used a slightly faster shutter speed just to add a bit more detail to the water.

[Mike Buckley]

I seem to struggle to get that clean polished look to my images.

What do you mean by that?

[bnnrcn]

Hi Chris. I like the shots. The details in the running water seem a bit lost and you say that you have a problem with sharpness. IMO what you need is some 'structure'. I added some structure to the second image with Viveza (globally and also selectively to the water) and then I applied a softlight blending mode with %65 opacity in PS for the below edit. We sometimes make quick edits for other members' images in order to help but if you don't like it please tell me, I will remove it immediately.





PS. I agree with the others that a faster shutter speed would bring out some detail in the water.

[Shadowman]

Sharpness doesn't seem t be a problem, having an abundance of white within such a lush setting could be more of an issue. If there were streaks of color it would have more variety, more realistic look, the silky smooth look is more of a fantasy rendition.

[Chri5]

Thank you all for the input it is very helpful.The yellow streaks in the water is actually the natural colour of the water in that area. You see most of the country side in the north east coast of Ireland is surrounded by peat bogs which makes the water a rich red/brown tone.

Mike when I say I seem to struggle to get that clean polished look to my shots I might just be being over critical of my work, It just seem to be gritty/ not pleasing to the eye if that makes any sense.

So the consensus is to slow the shutter speed down a bit an use a wider aperture? I wonder if I should invest in an nd filter instead of using a polariser?

Hi Chris. I like the shots. The details in the running water seem a bit lost and you say that you have a problem with sharpness. IMO what you need is some 'structure'. I added some structure to the second image with Viveza (globally and also selectively to the water) and then I applied a softlight blending mode with %65 opacity in PS for the below edit. We sometimes make quick edits for other members' images in order to help but if you don't like it please tell me, I will remove it immediately.




PS. I agree with the others that a faster shutter speed would bring out some detail in the water.

bnnrcn please feel free to edit my shots. You did a great job. It looks so much better than the original. Im not sure what Viveza is ill have a look and see

[bnnrcn]

Hi Chris. Viveza is a part of the Nik Software which I have been learning recently. It is a plug in. It is usually preferred for some people because of the U point technology which allows you to make your edits without making very precise selections like you have to in Photoshop.I find it useful. I applied the softlight blending mode to the image in Photoshop. I prefer to use both softwares' functions according to my needs. Another part of the Nik Software is Silver Efex Pro2 which is highly recommended here in CinC and in some books for B&W conversions. I'm actually trying to learn it these days.

BTW, although there is nothing wrong with using my user name 'bnnrcn', because I'm used to hearing 'Binnur' here in CinC, whenever you say 'bnnrcn' I think that you are talking to someone else , but then I realise that it is me you are talking to So, I would be happy if you called me 'Binnur' if it is not too difficult for you

bnnrcn please feel free to edit my shots. You did a great job. It looks so much better than the original. Im not sure what Viveza is ill have a look and see

[Chri5]

Ok Binnur that is fine im so used to using user names but i will star using your real name. Thanks for the help

[Stagecoach]

So the consensus is to slow the shutter speed down a bit an use a wider aperture? I wonder if I should invest in an nd filter instead of using a polariser?

Chris,

If you use a 'wider' aperture, say coming from f/22 to f/11 you will be allowing more light in, in which case you can use a faster shutter speed, not slower.

I mentioned this purely based on your comment that you are concerned about you images not having a 'clean polished' look and associating that with sharpness. It may very well be that you are being over critical of your work, a good thing, so there is scope with these shots to possibly get a greater IQ.

But saying that I have a number of similar slow water, rocks and detail shots that I have taken at f/22 to help me achieve that water effect of which I have no concerns about the sharpness as I feel it can be compensated for in post at these type of resolutions.

Regarding the use of a polariser they are very useful for these shots as additionally you can reduce reflection, you can also stack an ND on the front if required.

[Chri5]

Chris,

If you use a 'wider' aperture, say coming from f/22 to f/11 you will be allowing more light in, in which case you can use a faster shutter speed, not slower.

I mentioned this purely based on your comment that you are concerned about you images not having a 'clean polished' look and associating that with sharpness. It may very well be that you are being over critical of your work, a good thing, so there is scope with these shots to possibly get a greater IQ.

But saying that I have a number of similar slow water, rocks and detail shots that I have taken at f/22 to help me achieve that water effect of which I have no concerns about the sharpness as I feel it can be compensated for in post at these type of resolutions.

Regarding the use of a polariser they are very useful for these shots as additionally you can reduce reflection, you can also stack an ND on the front if required.

Hi Grahame.

Thanks very much for the informative input. The light conditions at the time may have been a little harsh which in turn might have effected the image. Both images where taken in mid afternoon.

[Mike Buckley]

Chris,

I'm only guessing, but perhaps the clean, polished look that you feel is missing in your photos has to do with lacking the mid-tone contrast. That mid-tone contrast is essentially the biggest difference between your version and Binnur's version.

Binnur also introduced more detail in the water by bringing out the grey tones. Ironically, the bright parts of water and clouds will appear brighter if grey tones are at least present if not prevalent. That's because the grey tones add some contrast to the brighter tones and help them pop out.

So, my hunch is that improving your post-processing skills will help considerably. You've already got the hard part down -- knowing what you want to see -- so a bit of dedication to fine-tuning your post-processing will do wonders for you.

Grahame discussed the issue of using f/22 but only alluded to the ramification, perhaps because he knows you are already aware of it. A lens is typically sharpest in its mid range of aperture settings. Another way of putting it is that a lens is generally sharpest when the aperture is set to about two stops away from the smallest setting. So, if you can achieve the desired blur in the water using a mid-range aperture setting, doing so might deliver results closer to what you hope to achieve regarding the crisp, polished look.

[Chri5]

Thanks mike,

Very helpful insight. Im starting to see that my PP skills seems to be the major issue here. I have been looking at the various tutorial so hopefully I can start learning how to process my shots to a better quality.

Thanks again

Chris.

[Whistletown Wilds]

I think the long exposure makes the water look like snow! Good composition!

[Polar01]

Chris I did a quick play with your first image, I do not know what you used to process the image, but what I found helped to put some definition into the water was to decrease the highlights as the water is close to having blown highlights they are not blown but close. I know that it is hard to get a good exposure where you can prevent the blacks from blocking up and the highlights from blowing out. But try just bring the highlights down and see if you can see the difference.

Cheers: Allan