Ingleton Falls

[raythefab]

Took today,advise pleasehttp://farm1.static.flickr.com/220/509940963_0a092437ef.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/205/509940979_5a89ca8b23.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/210/509940987_b396368ec7.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/220/509940997_1235edfe97.jpg

[staffitaxi]

Thornton Force (last one) is nice.

The other two don't quite capture it for me. It doesn't look like there was much water in t'beck which won't have helped.

Andrea

[cwinhall]

Hi raythefab,

I'm gonna give some contructive crtisism on these,hope that's ok.

All 3 are overexposed but without the right filters it can be hard to get a good balance between water, forground and background in these types of shots.

#1 photo the composition is off, there is too much room at the top of the photo, just slight more forground would of been great.

#2 is great compositionally, although I might mirror the image in photoshop (rotate it 180 degrees) so that the stream leads you in from the left side of the photo rather than the right side.

#3 The vertical composition is great but the horizontal composition is off, the waterfall is in the dead centre of the photo, if it had been slightly to the left or the right this shot would of been improved.

Hope this helps.

[raythefab]

right thank you for that im off now to mirror the one you said

[Jonnyreb]

Somethign else to throw into the pot, Ray, give the contrast a bit of a tweak and use the channel mixer to lift the greens and blues. Then have a play with the levels (or curves) to raise the detail in the 'interest' parts and reduce in the 'background' parts........

[staffitaxi]

Hi raythefab,

I'm gonna give some contructive crtisism on these,hope that's ok.

#2 is great compositionally, although I might mirror the image in photoshop (rotate it 180 degrees) so that the stream leads you in from the left side of the photo rather than the right side.

Hope this helps.

I just have a query with this. Sorry if I'm being stupid.

But...... surely by mirroring the image its a false image.

If someone wanted to go and try and reproduce the image they wouldn't be able to because the actual view doesn't exist.

Its a bit like taking a photo of a non symetrical house and mirroring it, you just wouldn't get that shot in reality.

Am I totally off mark? Or doesn't it matter?

Thanks

Andrea

[Jonnyreb]

I just have a query with this. Sorry if I'm being stupid.

But...... surely by mirroring the image its a false image.

If someone wanted to go and try and reproduce the image they wouldn't be able to because the actual view doesn't exist.

Its a bit like taking a photo of a non symetrical house and mirroring it, you just wouldn't get that shot in reality.

Am I totally off mark? Or doesn't it matter?

Thanks

Andrea

I'm with you there Andrea - I'm not keen on adding elements or, with the exception of cropping, altering the composition of a scene. I'm more than happy with extracting details from, and adjusting the exposure, colour, contrast but thats it for me...... But then photography is another form of art and expression so each to their own :)

[staffitaxi]

I'm probably being a bit touchy with this one.

Perhaps its because the subject is so close to home. Sometimes go round them just for fun in an evening in summer when all the tourists have gone home.

Have very few photos though surprisingly as I hardly ever take a camera round with me.

I just know that for most of the walk what you see is what you get. You can't move around to the degree that you can change angles that much as the paths just aren't safe enough to do it.

Andrea

[raythefab]

Somethign else to throw into the pot, Ray, give the contrast a bit of a tweak and use the channel mixer to lift the greens and blues. Then have a play with the levels (or curves) to raise the detail in the 'interest' parts and reduce in the 'background' parts........IM not to sure i know what i was doing here jonny, ive been tweaking and dabbling like you said and i came up with this
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/194/510805067_00447555ab.jpg
Model:Canon EOS 400D DIGITAL Orientation:Normal Software Used:ACD Systems Digital Imaging Exposure Time:1/6 seconds F Number:F/22 ISO Speed:200 Date Taken:2007:05:22 12:11:51 Exposure Compensation:0 Step Flash Mode:Flash did not fire; compulsory flash mode Focal Length:18 mm Color Space:sRGB

[Jonnyreb]

I'd concentrate on the last one if i were you Ray - there is plenty of detail to extract as it is the best exposed of the group (I cant see the 2nd as you didn't finish the link with [/img]). You have the right idea with the adjustments you made to the first, but the over-exposed water still draws the eye. I'll have a play with #4 when i get home if you dont mind?

[raythefab]

I'd concentrate on the last one if i were you Ray - there is plenty of detail to extract as it is the best exposed of the group (I cant see the 2nd as you didn't finish the link with [/img]). You have the right idea with the adjustments you made to the first, but the over-exposed water still draws the eye. I'll have a play with #4 when i get home if you dont mind?not at al be my guest:love:

[raythefab]

this is the other one
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/205/509940979_5a89ca8b23.jpg

[Jonnyreb]

Cool - thats actually the best I think.

I'm guessing here, but i think the problem is that you've had an in-betweeny shutter speed and aperture, and not really achieved one thing or other. Faster shutter would have controlled the over-exposure problem (obviously) and smaller app would have produced a smoother flow and under exposed more. Do you have any exif data to hand for these at all?

[Jonnyreb]

Ray - as promised, a dabble in CS3:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/205/511005140_3a4e26ee63_o.jpg

Cheers
Jon

[raythefab]

jonny ive been playing with the raw file of the first photo,in lightroom,and i came up with this is it any better please
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/228/511165091_fc793bdad2.jpg

[Jonnyreb]

try to bring the greens up a little and a little more brightness - the contrast is better :thumbs:

[raythefab]

jonny ive been playing with the raw file of the first photo,in lightroom,and i came up with this is it any better please
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/228/511165091_fc793bdad2.jpgis this better
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/213/511186297_3638dd3689.jpg

[Jonnyreb]

works for me :thumbs:

[raythefab]

works for me :thumbs:
well thank you kind sir,there's more to this photography lark than pressing a shutter botton:lol:

[cwinhall]

I just have a query with this. Sorry if I'm being stupid.

But...... surely by mirroring the image its a false image.

If someone wanted to go and try and reproduce the image they wouldn't be able to because the actual view doesn't exist.

Its a bit like taking a photo of a non symetrical house and mirroring it, you just wouldn't get that shot in reality.

Am I totally off mark? Or doesn't it matter?

Thanks

Andrea
Fair enough if you are out to take a memorable photo of a place you want to remember, but if you are attempting to take a great photo of something, something as simple as rotating the picture 180 degrees so it is inversed is not taking away from anything. Infact, I sometimes take a shot on purpose one way becuase I know I can later invert it.