The Rapids

[joebranko]

At Niagara Falls Ontario. The green colour is a result of dissolved minerals in the water.

[Manfred M]

Joe - this one is not working for me. Out eyes tend to be drawn to the brightest part of the image, and in this case it is the spray from the falls; and this takes up a good 2/3 of the image. There is nothing that helps direct our eyes to any specific part of the image.

[joebranko]

Joe - this one is not working for me. Out eyes tend to be drawn to the brightest part of the image, and in this case it is the spray from the falls; and this takes up a good 2/3 of the image. There is nothing that helps direct our eyes to any specific part of the image.

I see your point. The mist was very thick and takes over the entire shot. I have tried here to darken the mist and hopefully be able to see through it.

[Ziggy]

What a great view of the falls.

The first one works for me. That has to be a difficult shot.

[Rebel]

Its a good idea but the spray/mist is just too much for me.

[Manfred M]

Joe - I'm not sure if the re-edit does much for me and would say +1 to Matt's comment

I follow a simple "process" when assessing my own shots.

I ask myself what the first thing I notice in one of my images is? If it's not the subject of the image, I know I have a problem and the composition is not working. In both shots, the first thing I see is the spray, not the rapids. I personally find that photographing the Canadian / Horseshoe Falls is extremely difficult, just because of the high levels of spray and mist. The American Falls tend to be a lot easier to capture.

[Rebel]

If you're using photoshop/lightroom, I wonder if the dehaze slider would help?

[Manfred M]

If you're using photoshop/lightroom, I wonder if the dehaze slider would help?

Matt - I played around with your suggestion and applied a pretty heavy does of dehaze to see what would come out.




Cranking up the filter high enough to have an impact on the haze introduced a fair bit of noise, strange colour casts and other artifacts, but it does bring out a better view of the churning water. One can certainly see more structure in the water. Some of the issues are brought on by editing a jpeg, as artifacts are showing up in the edit.

[Rebel]

Matt - I played around with your suggestion and applied a pretty heavy does of dehaze to see what would come out.




Cranking up the filter high enough to have an impact on the haze introduced a fair bit of noise, strange colour casts and other artifacts, but it does bring out a better view of the churning water. One can certainly see more structure in the water. Some of the issues are brought on by editing a jpeg, as artifacts are showing up in the edit.

Thats worked quite well, you can see the water behind now. I'm on my phone so can't see the noise etc

[bnnrcn]

Hi Joe. It seems that the dehaze slider made a good job, I like the image

[Shadowman]

The edit helps define the scene.

[Manfred M]

Thats worked quite well, you can see the water behind now. I'm on my phone so can't see the noise etc

I've done some noise reduction, applied selective (and a bit of global) desaturation, etc. I've run the result through Nik Dfine to reduce the noise and used Nik Color Efex (Pro Contrast filter). I seem to remember that Joe edits in Lightroom, so his editing capabilities are going to be a bit more limited than what I can achieve in Photoshop and the Nik Plugins.

[joebranko]

If you're using photoshop/lightroom, I wonder if the dehaze slider would help?

Thanks Matt. Unfortunately my version of Lightroom does not include dehaze.

[joebranko]

What a great view of the falls.

The first one works for me. That has to be a difficult shot.

Thanks Jim.

[joebranko]

Matt - I played around with your suggestion and applied a pretty heavy does of dehaze to see what would come out.



Thanks Manfred. That has made a great impact.


Cranking up the filter high enough to have an impact on the haze introduced a fair bit of noise, strange colour casts and other artifacts, but it does bring out a better view of the churning water. One can certainly see more structure in the water. Some of the issues are brought on by editing a jpeg, as artifacts are showing up in the edit.

[joebranko]

I've done some noise reduction, applied selective (and a bit of global) desaturation, etc. I've run the result through Nik Dfine to reduce the noise and used Nik Color Efex (Pro Contrast filter). I seem to remember that Joe edits in Lightroom, so his editing capabilities are going to be a bit more limited than what I can achieve in Photoshop and the Nik Plugins.

You are correct Manfred. I do use Lightroom; and it does not feature dehaze. Your edits have made the shot very attractive. Thanks again.

[IzzieK]

Joe, Sorry to be late, but I want to let you know that I like your water treatment here, I was thinking you overdid the shutter speed a bit or like Jeff Blackmore said on his water shot, he used 1/3 SS in his and it turned out all right. The edit of Manfred looks good...

[joebranko]

Joe, Sorry to be late, but I want to let you know that I like your water treatment here, I was thinking you overdid the shutter speed a bit or like Jeff Blackmore said on his water shot, he used 1/3 SS in his and it turned out all right. The edit of Manfred looks good...

Thanks Izzie. Can you access the EXIF for these shots? If so please let me know how?

[Manfred M]

Thanks Izzie. Can you access the EXIF for these shots? If so please let me know how?

Joe - I use the Firefox browser and there are two plugins that might be of interest to you, if you use it:

1. http://eyrich-net.org/mozilla/fxif/ This lets you see the metadata attached to the image if it has not been stripped out.

2, http://www.davidfichtmueller.de/histogramviewer-en.html That lets you look at the histogram of the image you are viewing.

[IzzieK]

Thanks Izzie. Can you access the EXIF for these shots? If so please let me know how?

It depends on what browser/search engine you use. I use Chrome so I have this one. It is free and it works.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/d...mjapkffm?hl=en

You can choose one for your browser here with explanation.

http://carlcheo.com/best-exif-viewers

Hope this helps.