Alberta Falls, Rocky Mountain National Park - Colorado

[Kathy O]

Love these falls. I think I could sit there all day and just listen to the water! Constructive advice is welcome

[lovelife65]

Very nice Kathy O.
Trying to decide which is my fav.

[Shadowman]

You nailed the focus on the foreground so the silky water is forgiven. Nicely done.

[LePetomane]

Kathy, I like the second one better. The foreground appears closer as if one could walk right into the scene. I also like the fact there is sky in the picture.

When I saw "Alberta Falls" I was expecting to see something from the Canadian province where my wife has family.

[Donald]

I tend to go the other way from Paul. I think the second one has got too many elements in it - Sky, Mountain, Sunlit trees, Shaded trees, Rocks, Waterfall, Water in a quiet area, etc. You get my point. I think there maybe too much in the image. It's a good general view, bit I think the waterfall gets a bit lost.

Shutter speed - The first one is at 1/8, the second one at 1/3. You can see that in the water. If you like the cotton wool water then you'll prefer the second one. I don't. I think the shutter time is bang-on inn the first one. You're aware of the watering crashing down, but there is still enough detail to keep it realistic.

I think the one sunlit tree in the second one is perfect in that it gives the image all the depth that it needs.

For me, the major point for debate is whether that tree at the right hand side, in the first image, adds to the image or distracts from the waterfall. I think that it does the same job as that sunlit tree at the back, it gives the image depth. I think you could make a super image without that tree there, but I think that what you have done is correct.

I don't know what you call that at the foot of the tree at the right hand side. It looks like our broom - just a small yellow flower at the end of the branches. That adds a splash of colour to that side of the frame, which would be a lot duller without it.

So, the first one it really an impressive image. The elements in the frame come together to produce a well-balanced image. The second one serves to show us what you left out of the first one and I believe you made a careful decision on that which has worked for you.

[Kathy O]

Very nice Kathy O.
Trying to decide which is my fav.

Thank you Sharon!! I like things about both photos. I like the first one because my main focus when I look at it is the waterfall and the rocks around it. The second one I love the light on the trees, I think it brings out the color in the rocks and the mountain in background brings all of my favorite things together -- waterfall, trees and mountain boulders. Can't decide which I like better -- maybe it doesn't matter they both have their own story.

[Kathy O]

You nailed the focus on the foreground so the silky water is forgiven. Nicely done.

Thank you John

[Kathy O]

I tend to go the other way from Paul. I think the second one has got too many elements in it - Sky, Mountain, Sunlit trees, Shaded trees, Rocks, Waterfall, Water in a quiet area, etc. You get my point. I think there maybe too much in the image. It's a good general view, bit I think the waterfall gets a bit lost.

Shutter speed - The first one is at 1/8, the second one at 1/3. You can see that in the water. If you like the cotton wool water then you'll prefer the second one. I don't. I think the shutter time is bang-on inn the first one. You're aware of the watering crashing down, but there is still enough detail to keep it realistic.

I think the one sunlit tree in the second one is perfect in that it gives the image all the depth that it needs.

For me, the major point for debate is whether that tree at the right hand side, in the first image, adds to the image or distracts from the waterfall. I think that it does the same job as that sunlit tree at the back, it gives the image depth. I think you could make a super image without that tree there, but I think that what you have done is correct.

I don't know what you call that at the foot of the tree at the right hand side. It looks like our broom - just a small yellow flower at the end of the branches. That adds a splash of colour to that side of the frame, which would be a lot duller without it.

So, the first one it really an impressive image. The elements in the frame come together to produce a well-balanced image. The second one serves to show us what you left out of the first one and I believe you made a careful decision on that which has worked for you.

Thank you Donald, I really appreciate your insight I have a tough time deciding which photo I like best, each one has their own story -- one that shares it beauty with the elements around it and the other say "Hey no need to look any farther, I'm right here!"

[Kathy O]

Thank you everyone for your insight on my photos, I will be posting some more photos that I think have some real potential and I would love for your advice to help make them reach that potential.

[Kathy O]

Kathy, I like the second one better. The foreground appears closer as if one could walk right into the scene. I also like the fact there is sky in the picture.

When I saw "Alberta Falls" I was expecting to see something from the Canadian province where my wife has family.

Thank you Paul!

[DanK]

I much prefer the first one as well. The second one has a lot going on, and my eye wandered.

IMHO, the first is really a keeper, but it needs some sprucing up. It's quite dark, and most of the image lies within a fairly narrow tonal range, which gives it a dark and drab appearance. If it were mine, I would brighten it, which would also bring out some detail in the large shadow area, and add some contrast. Just to give you an idea, I did a very quick and dirty edit. I brightened the image in camera raw, added a touch of contrast with a curves tool, and then burned some of the rocks at the left and top to avoid having them distract from the waterfall. It's not a polished edit,but it shows the directions I was thinking of. See if you think something in this direction would be an improvement.

[Kathy O]

I much prefer the first one as well. The second one has a lot going on, and my eye wandered.

IMHO, the first is really a keeper, but it needs some sprucing up. It's quite dark, and most of the image lies within a fairly narrow tonal range, which gives it a dark and drab appearance. If it were mine, I would brighten it, which would also bring out some detail in the large shadow area, and add some contrast. Just to give you an idea, I did a very quick and dirty edit. I brightened the image in camera raw, added a touch of contrast with a curves tool, and then burned some of the rocks at the left and top to avoid having them distract from the waterfall. It's not a polished edit,but it shows the directions I was thinking of. See if you think something in this direction would be an improvement.

Hey Dan, thanks for showing me your vision for the photo I do like how much better the rocks stand out now and the punch of color they radiate. The only problem I have for your edit is I don't like how bright the water fall is . Love the rocks though

[DanK]

The only problem I have for your edit is I don't like how bright the water fall is .

Easy to fix. You might just burn it a bit, or pull the white point down. I'd opt for the former, so as not to darken the highlights in the rocks. For example, here's a version with two burn layers, one modest for the whole falls and another denser for the very bright area at the top:

[Kathy O]

Easy to fix. You might just burn it a bit, or pull the white point down. I'd opt for the former, so as not to darken the highlights in the rocks. For example, here's a version with two burn layers, one modest for the whole falls and another denser for the very bright area at the top:

Dan I did a little bit of editing using your suggestions, don't think it is as vibrant as yours but it does pop a little more. I don't want it to look to processed but yet I want it to pop -- it's a tough line to follow.

[Cantab]

Dan I did a little bit of editing using your suggestions, don't think it is as vibrant as yours but it does pop a little more. I don't want it to look to processed but yet I want it to pop -- it's a tough line to follow.

Ultimately, you want something that fits your vision of what you're hoping to convey. When I saw the original version of the first photo, I assumed the area was one that received only a low level of natural light, hence the somewhat sombre tones. Not having been there, I have no idea which of the subsequent edits more closely resembles what you saw and, probably more importantly, what you want to convey. In any event, I like your two versions.

[rpcrowe]

IMO - both images are lovely but, I tend to like #2 the best.

The Rocky Mountain National Park is one of the most beautiful areas I have ever visited...

I didn't have a decent camera when I visited there and would like to go back and do some serious shooting...

[Kathy O]

IMO - both images are lovely but, I tend to like #2 the best.

The Rocky Mountain National Park is one of the most beautiful areas I have ever visited...

I didn't have a decent camera when I visited there and would like to go back and do some serious shooting...

Rocky Mountain National Park is the place I go for peace, we are about 7 hours from there and we make sure we get there every year. The hiking is fantastic, that is where you see the real beauty. Thank you for your input