• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Collection: Waterfalls, fresh and frozen, broad and narrow, low and high!

P

Peter Mendelson

New member
Every so often I want to look again at outstanding pictures that have become buried. So we are building collections. Her we bring together copies of post showing waterfalls. These will change over time.


Your succinct critique is welcome and your new work are all welcome. Some may end up staying here, othrs will find their way to strengthen related threads but you will be informed. Asher


Peter Mendelson's post with B&W images opens this subject:



Following my lengthy deliberations (which are the subject of a different thread), I finally decided on getting the 16-35L mkII as my super wide angle choice for my 5D. I received it yesterday and immediately went out in the evening to shoot some local waterfalls. I was very happy with the edge-to-edge sharpness of this lens, and am posting the following examples in case anyone is interested or has questions. I was concerned after reading some posts by people who were not that happy with the performance of their copies of this lens at the long end, but I found the performance to be very satisfactory at the long and the short end. I will probably use this lens more often stopped down, but it was quite good even at f/2.8. I got some shots with it wide open indoors that I just would not have been able to with the 17-40L.

p135927626-5.jpg


p341722839-5.jpg


p318811452-5.jpg


p462777387-5.jpg


Thanks,

Peter
 
Last edited by a moderator:
L

Louis Doench

New member
First Post in awhile, a waterfall!

With my domestic life a bit busy (2 year old w/ another coming any day now) I don't get to do a lot of shooting outdoors.

Luckily this waterfall is indoors at the Krohn Conservatory in Eden Park, Cincinnati.

505995522_fbe6a93aea.jpg

No tripod! crouched down against the railing and used a slow flash fill in. Not an effect I get that often. Converted to B/W thru the channel mixer, about 45% Red/55% green.

Feel free to tell me what you all think.
 
T

Tom Robbins

Member
Louis, I envy your indoor waterfalls! Hope all goes well with the family.

Asher, had to resist the temptation to go out and buy a copy of the new 16-35 after seeing Peter's images. I like the b&w treatment very much.

71591315.jpg


The above shot of falls at Starved Rock State Park in Illinois was taken last December on a foggy morning using the old Canon 28-70mm f2.8 zoom. After years of trying, I have to admit that I've never really been pleased with any of the resulting photos. Hmmm, maybe I really do need that new 16-35mm!
 
R

ron_hiner

New member
These are all stunning shots...

I wish you would all post your shutter speed used.... that seems like a crucial element to getting the water to look smooth and silky -- but retaining the texture.

I'm guessing the time is somewhere between 2 seconds and 1/3 of second -- but thats a big range.

Ron
 
R

ron_hiner

New member
Your modest one blows mine away!

calypso_600.jpg


I'm experimenting with tecnique here... Please comment.

I shot 5 shots all at 1/3 second, but with varying aperatures, on a tripod of course, with an ND filter.

I took my two favorite (defined and the one with the best water, and the one with best rocks and foliage) and tried CS3 HDR. The results were terrible.

So took the two shots and put them into one image in photshop and using a mask, picked and chose the best parts of each image.

So there's my result.

I'm new at this waterfall stuff. C&C is appreciated.

Ron

P.S. very interesting... viewing it my web browser makes it look more overexposed/washed out than does viewing it in photoshop.
 
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Ron,

I like the picture a lot. I'd love to have more of the tree on the right if you have it and some spray in the air.

Your appproach is entrirely logical since that's how the eye and human brain works, processing the different zones to the best advantage. You are capturing the data that way. Post processing is fine too.

I'm not always a fan of the creamy look and think experimentation with faster shutter's is worth looking at from time to time or even combining the effects.

Asher
 
J

Josh Liechty

New member
Bridal Veil falls (detail), Black Hills National Forest
jliechty_20070508_3406.jpg


Small waterfall upstream from Tower Falls, Yellowstone National Park
jliechty_20070511_3815.jpg


Upper Falls in Yellowstone National Park
jliechty_20070510_3580.jpg


Sorry about the lack of EXIF; I'll excuse myself because I was unfamiliar with Lightroom at the time, and didn't see this mistake until after the photos were posted online and had been commented upon. The first and third were taken with a Nikon 70-200mm, while the middle one was shot using a 17-35mm lens. All were long exposures from a tripod; no HDR or stitching was done for any of these - I'm not good enough to do that sort of thing with still subjects, let alone moving water.

After revisiting all of the photos in this thread, I can't help but comment on Ben's third photo. Everyone's waterfalls have been good IMHO, but this particular one is so spectacular - an excellent waterfall in a fantastic landscape!
 
R

Ray West

New member
Hi Ron,

I like the composition , the curvature, the framing, apart from a little irritation with the black wedge in the log running down the rhs. The sharp image of the rocks and banks and trees look as if its been pasted on top of a blurred waterfall. I think it needs some splashes/drops of water to break up the sharp outlines of the rocks, or maybe selectively blur the sharp area to direct your eye to a point of interest, to enhance the depth of perspective. I prefer sharp water, it splashes, not oozes like cream. As you mention, the web image may exaggerate the effect. If you can return, take the shots with a range of speeds. Close up waterfall needs a different speed than far off, to capture the movement.

Best wishes,

Ray
 
J

John_Nevill

New member
I'm back from a week in the Yorkshire Dales and what a picturesque part of the world it is.

I've never seen so many waterfalls!

Here's my favourite, Thornton Force near Ingleton (its worth the walk)"

Thornton%20Falls.jpg


5D + EF24-70, f22 @ 0.6 sec, ISO 50 (RAW converted in Silkypix).

I found there was no rule of thumb for getting a smooth yet detailed watery effect. It all depends upon the speed of flow. Too slow a shutter yeilds a milky white mush, too fast and its frozen. Good old "trial and error" plus a sturdy tripod!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi John,

Pictures of moving water can be so different depending on the recording system and the shutter speed of course. I was surprised and awed by Jim Collum's photographs of the sea shore waves taken with a BetterLight scanning back. The timing of the lateral image capture sweep gives incredible effects.

I like your picture. It is very interesting to see the progessive levels of the falls zig zagging from the top. I wonder whether you might consider sharpening and increasing the contrast somewhat to the rocks on the left selectively so that the rocks become more important and draw the eye to the waterflow there as well as the main part of the picture. This is because I feel that the tree on the right is incomplete so that the features on the left may now draw the interest so that there is more equilibrium as well as dyhnamic interest for the eyes.

Anyway, irrespective of my ideas, this is a beautiful picture and is perfectly enjoyable and does not need any changes.

Asher

BTW, is the rust colored center of the water streams due to mud sediment, suggesting a seasonal increase in flow?
 
J

John_Nevill

New member
Thanks Asher,

Although a quick PP, I found silkypix retained the true colours of the water, rocks and foilage. LR immediately made the overall image more contrasty and less colour real. I'll defintely try the selective sharpening and contrast adjustment. Thanks for the tip!

Spot on, the brownish tinge to the water is peat. Some say it's beer-like, in the "Yorkshire bitter" sense. But i'm a Guiness drinker, so all beers look blonde to me!

Here's Hardraw Force brought to recent acclaim by a well known US actor!

Hardraw%20Force.jpg


Can you name the actor and film?
 
J

John_Nevill

New member
Asher,

Here's the revised image based on your recommendation.

Thornton%20Force%20small.jpg


I like it, selective sharpening and contrast adjustment adds more dimension to the image. Although the CS3 bicubic sharper downsizing may have over emphasised the detail.

The full size image looks more subtle, now to print it out at A3.
 
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Bart_van_der_Wolf said:
While a specific pano rotation setup will cause fewer problems in postprocessing (especially in foreground parallax), a bit of shooting technique can help handheld shots.

Important: Do not rotate/pivot around your neck, but pivot around an imaginary point (entry pupil) that's approximately* located at 2x the focal length in front of the film/sensor plane, on the optical axis.

* Approximately, because the actual location depends on the optical design of the lens, and focus distance.

Bart
Click to expand...
Exactly, Bart, that's what I do. I swing my imaginary optical axis point 2" in front of the lens. Here's an example. This is part of a recent shoot in Colarado. I did a shoot with 3 Brazilian Girls and this is the place where I did the shoot. So while they were climbing down, I made this quick pano of a whole bunch of portrait images. Exact no I'll add later with EXIF.

Pano - _MG_1938 -Boulder_Falls.jpg

© 2007 Asher Kelman "Boulder Falls for 3 Brazilian Girls" Do not Copy.​

Asher
 
Last edited:
B

Bart_van_der_Wolf

pro member
Asher Kelman said:
Exactly, Bart, that's what I do. I swing my imaginary optical axis point 2" in front of the lens. Here's an example.
Click to expand...

Great shot(s) of what looks to be a frozen waterfall! A slight crop of the right edge might improve things, and add to the sensation of height. I do wonder, and Nicolas Claris will like my question, how things looked in color though? You apparently made good use of your Colorado trip, might I ask about the 3 Brazilian girls in Colorado winter, wazzup?
biggrin.gif


Bart
 
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Bart_van_der_Wolf said:
Great shot(s) of what looks to be a frozen waterfall! A slight crop of the right edge might improve things, and add to the sensation of height. I do wonder, and Nicolas Claris will like my question, how things looked in color though? You apparently made good use of your Colorado trip, might I ask about the 3 Brazilian girls in Colorado winter, wazzup?
biggrin.gif


Bart
Click to expand...

I too wondered anout the consideration of mass and height. one issue is that there has to be something by which one can recognize height. People are perfect.

I spent considerable time debating about showing the right rock mass as it is. Actually there is more in the lower left, 3 girls in another set of images.Here, where there are no people, I had planned to replace blocks of rock with empty black space to balance the composition as I am reluctant to either make the waterfalls central or have the disquiet of what I see as an unbalance. I decided to post this as it is and see who has comments.

I will add the black space blanced image for fun, tomorrow and the detaqils of the shot.

Color is difficult in this failing light just enough to climb back on the ice all the way up to the road. I couldn't find any green at all in the trees and so I examined a black and white version. This series is essentially a work in progress.

I will post separately pictures of the girls.

Asher
 
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Color & Crops

Here is the pano in color, still assymetical:

Pano - _MG_1938_Color.jpg

©2007 Asher Kelman Boulder Water Falls in Color Do not copy.
​

And bow look at the same image cropped narrow to try to give more of a sense of the height of the landscape:

Pano - _MG_1938 - Narrow crop.jpg

©2007 Asher Kelman Boulder Water Falls in Color, Narrow Do not copy.​

I prefer to leave the image assymetrcial, however, there is discomfort in soing so,

Asher

BTW, Just 4 5D RAW images, Manual Exposure, ISO 1600, 50 1.2L at f 5.0, 1/197 sec, stitched from RAW in AutoPano Pro
 
Last edited:
R

Robert Mielke

New member
If you had a choice on where to eat lunch why wouldn't you pick this location along one of America's most scenic stretch of highway? There are seven waterfalls along a seven mile stretch, each more beautiful than the last. Multnomah Falls is rated a 10, the highest rated tourist location in Oregon.

266407046_Cux7R-L.jpg


266406796_aSKy7-L.jpg
 
Doug Kerr

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

Asher Kelman said:
Exactly, Bart, that's what I do. I swing my imaginary optical axis point 2" in front of the lens.
Click to expand...

Did you conclude that this was where the entrance pupil probably was? Not real likely.

It's real easy to tell where it is. Just look in the front of the lens, and note where the aperture stop seems to be (use the DoF preview to close the iris to make it more manifest). Where it looks like it is, that is actually where the entrance pupil is (what you really see is by definition the entrance pupil).
 
D

David A. Goldfarb

New member
PuahokumoaFalls,Maui,21Aug2005(albumen).jpg


Linhof 4x5 Tech V, 360/5.5 Tele-Xenar, medium yellow filter, f:32, 1/2 sec.
Efke PL100, ABC pyro
Albumen print, Strathmore 500 2-ply, gold toned

The brightness range between the near tree trunks and the falls was huge--like an indoor/outdoor shot. The self-masking property of albumen printing, common to all printing out processes like Ziatype and Centennial POP, makes it possible to get detail in the highlights without the shadows completely blocking up. The texture of the paper muddles the scan somewhat.
 
Asher Kelman

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Doug,

This was just meant to be a region from ~2" in front of the lens to a little behind the lens as the limit I want to keep the optical node to move within, as I hold the camera freehand, the freezing cold wind blasting me! When the node is kept approximately within this limit, I find that the images can be stitched with little parallax problems in scenes like this.

Asher
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top