Lower Screw-Up

[Loose Canon]

While the title of this thread may describe my attempt on this shot, it is actually the name of this rapid. It is one of the most notorious rapids on Richland Creek in Arkansas, USofA. It is a Class IV+/V rapid when the river is runnable, depending on the water levels, and it can have dire consequences if you blow your line running it. There are three numbered “doors” at the entry to this rapid and we are looking at Door #3. These doors are slots between house sized boulders which must be maneuvered before you even get to the “meat’ of the rapid.

This was taken at low (unrunnable) water levels and that is the only time you can get into it by foot without a kayak (Oops! Did I spell “kayak" backwards again?) It takes two creek crossings over two different whitewater creeks to get to it. Not a good time to lose your footing with a pack full of camera gear on your back!

I would have liked to get a lower POV and maybe get a rock or something in the foreground for this, but getting down much lower was a crap-shoot at best. Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor when you are in the backcountry!

All the Best,
Terry



Camera: Canon EOS 50D
Lens: 17-50mm f/2.7
Shot at 50 mm
Exposure: Manual exposure, 1/4 sec, f/22, ISO 100
Flash: Off, Did not fire
Color Underwear Worn While Shooting:

As always, I am open to suggestion if anyone would care to!

[Donald]

Terry

Your explanation of what we're looking at adds significantly to the enjoyment of this image. If you hadn't set the context then we would 'just' be looking at another picture of water flowing through rocks.

A small point - that bit of rock just creeping in towards the bottom at the left. What would it look like if, a) it was cloned out or, b) if you have already cropped on the right, re-cropping to make a shift to the right (which would also allow for the whole of the rock at the lower right to be included)?

I think you've got the shutter speed well matched to the speed of the water flow.

[Hans]

The rapid white water looks very cool.

Or what about cropping just under the white water at, say, the base of the rock on the right? the water in the foreground just doesn't really add anything for me nor act as a lead into the image...what do you think?

While the title of this thread may describe my attempt on this shot

Terry, wait until I get my Tokina 11-16mm f2.8! Then I'll show you how to really screw up a landscape

[arith]

I like water I just don't like getting wet. I think you should invest in a waterproof camera because these are really good and maybe point the camera slightly more to the right to get the passage on a third. The inner vertical AF ponts on the standard viewfinder of the 50D are exactly on thirds, and horizontal pairs are just inside thirds.

I think it is a great lead in and a great picture I would definitely would like to take but will never do so, so I leave it up to you Terry.

[yjiang]

I think you've got the shutter speed well matched to the speed of the water flow.

Hi Donald: How important is to let "the shutter speed well matched to the speed of the water flow"? What is effect if matched or not matched?

I am curious to know it.

Thanks!

[Donald]

Yi

What I meant was the impact that the shutter speed has on how the water appears in the final image.

At each extreme we could have, with a very fast shutter speed, the water completely frozen or, with a slow shutter speed, the water looking like froth, or 'cotton wool' (which, in my opinion, looks awful).

But the judgement is not one that can be based on one shutter speed for all situations. It will be informed by how quickly the water is flowing. So, for some images 1/4 shutter speed will be give the the best representation of water flowing (as I think it does in this case). In other cases, where water is flowing more quickly, it may be that 1/8 or faster will produce the optimum result.

So, I believe it requires skill and judgement to decide upon the exposure that will retain realism in relation to the waterflow, but at the same time show movement.

[yjiang]

Very informative! Thanks a lot!

[Loose Canon]

Donald, Hans, Steve?

Many thanks for having a look at this.

I noticed that piece of rock as I was posting the shot, and thought “Oops”! But I decided to leave it and get called on it. For me learning the hard way seems to be the best way sometimes, unfortunately! Also I kind of blew the framing on this and the slicing off of the rock to the right will have to stay that way because there is no more. However, I did a quick crop in an attempt to lose the piece of rock to the left and to try to also follow Hans’ advice on the composition. And Hans? Nobody, and I mean nobody, can screw-up like me! Upper Screw-Up, (and there is one on this river), Lower, or anywhere in between! And mundane? I’m just getting warmed up! But I’ll be looking forward to seeing your ‘scapes with the new glass, sir.

Steve, I have an H2O-proof P&S Run & Gun. I keep it clipped to my PFD when I am boating! Got lots of happy underwater shots of those huge rocks I am about to bash my fool head into by virtue of being upside down in my boat!

This was what I was going to post:
”I do have a question if I may? What does it mean to have the shutter speed matched to the water flow? I’m going to take a shot at this and say that it may mean that the shutter speed is not so slow as to produce so much cotton candy and obscure all detail and separation of the water trails? Nor so fast as to completely stop each drop?”

But Yi beat me to it! Can’t believe I figured that one out on my own!

Thank you all again. I am trying to lay in a foundation of some sort here and you guys are proving invaluable in helping me attempt to do so.

Second try: