Waterfall Path

[escape]

I thought it was a nice scene. It seems to me that the eyes are drawn away from the waterfall down the path, thus the title. Comments welcomed.

[Geoff F]

The only problem for me is what looks like a post in the bottom right corner. I would crop that out. Which means having a different size ratio or also losing a similar amount from top or bottom.

[escape]

The only problem for me is what looks like a post in the bottom right corner. I would crop that out. Which means having a different size ratio or also losing a similar amount from top or bottom.

Thank you, Geoff. Seeing only one problem is a plus for me. I wonder if the image has too many distinct regions.

[Round Tuit]

... I wonder if the image has too many distinct regions.

I would say Yes. If t were mine I would crop most of the trees from the top as well as the right side to eliminate the post. Something like this:



I have also added a touch of overall contrast using a curve, increased the local contrast slightly and marginally increased the saturation.

[DanK]

Daniel,

I'm certainly no expert on either landscapes or composition. However, I find it helpful to ask myself: "where do I want the viewer's eye to go?" Often (this is a guideline, not a rule), it's best to have one central focus, and the other parts of the image should lead the viewer to it. This is what's meant by "leading lines," for example. This doesn't mean you want the viewer not to see the rest. It just means that the eye should be drawn to one part.

However, this is just a guideline. There are plenty of successful images for which it doesn't work. Sometimes, for example, you may want the eye to go back and forth between two contrasting areas.

Nonetheless, if I follow that guideline in this case, it leads me to the conclusion that there's too much. It seems to me that there are three distinct focal areas: one at the top left, one at the bottom left, and one at the right.

Because I'm not a very good landscape photographer, I can't come up with many good examples. However, the one below might help. The core place I want the eye to settle is on the arrow shape formed by the grasses and their reflection. That's why I violated another common guideline and made the image symmetrical top to bottom. The trees and their reflection are framing and provide leading lines.

Dan

[escape]

Thank you, Andre and Dan. I'm in Northern Florida for a year. My photo subjects are taking a turn from City shots.

[Geoff F]

Composition is always a matter of personal choice, Daniel. Andre's crop concentrates on the waterfall, which is OK, but you then lose the context of it being a woodland path.

Which of the potential main subjects is most important to you?

[billtils]

I didn't really "get" the woodland path bit - to me it's about the waterfall and I like Andre's edit (and Dan's comments)

[escape]

Composition is always a matter of personal choice, Daniel. Andre's crop concentrates on the waterfall, which is OK, but you then lose the context of it being a woodland path.

Which of the potential main subjects is most important to you?

On this image, you have to go with the cropped version. Just too much going on with the larger view. I recognize that fact. When I was there, I shot closer views of the waterfall that resembled Andres's cropped version.

[escape]

I didn't really "get" the woodland path bit - to me it's about the waterfall and I like Andre's edit (and Dan's comments)

Good question about the title. I couldn't call it a waterfall because there is too much going on in the photo. I thought by calling it the waterfall path it would put emphasis on the path which might make the image more unified. Just my thinking.