First Waterfall Pictures

smr

smr

Messages
1,888
Name
Joel
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

I bought myself a Canon EOS 700D for Christmas, yesterday I went to photograph some waterfalls at Lumsdale Falls near the Peak District, I haven't had a DSLR for long so I was wondering if anyone had any constructive criticism for me to get better at photography. This was my first time trying to get my head around Aperture - ISO - shutter time.

I'd be grateful for any any advice.

IMG_0751 by smurkej, on Flickr

IMG_0744 by smurkej, on Flickr

IMG_0710 by smurkej, on Flickr

IMG_0802 by smurkej, on Flickr
 
Contrary to Jeff's opinion I suggest that flat, overcast light is preferable for photographing waterfalls. It will be darker and therefore easier to get the sort of shutter speeds you need (0.25 - 1.00 seconds) without using a ND filter.

Many waterfalls lie in wooded ravines where extremes of contrast and disruptive shadows can be a problem. A lack of sunlight will prevent these from occurring.

Try using a polariser. Don't bother with a "big stopper" or even a little one. (ND filter). You can get decent shutter speeds (see above) if you use a small aperture (eg f16) , and you will need this for a good depth of field.

Most automatic meters will give you a good overall exposure and you can tweak this if you feel you need to.

It is then up to you to explore different locations and try different compositions. Of those above I would say no1 is the most successful. The others are a bit messy and/or don't really do justice to the waterfall itself.
 
Agreed.

Dull overcast days tend to suit waterfalls. Not only can you get away without using filters to slow the shutter speed, you can also get away with having to use tiny apertures to slow things down.

I think for a first go these are good. How much movement in the water you go for is a personal thing. some like pure milk whilst others prefer something in between. These are about right for my personal taste.
 
They look great to me. Love the first image the best :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
I also prefer the first one. I've just looked at the photo on Flickr and see that you shot it at ISO 100, f/11, 1 sec. Personally I think these settings are spot on (y) A 1 sec shutter speed has blurred the water just the right amount, and balancing f/11 and ISO 100 has worked well. I'd have shot it at exactly the same settings I think. Some people might say f/16 and ISO 200 would be better for the increased DoF, but at 28mm the difference in DoF isn't huge, especially when there isn't a great deal of foreground like in this shot.

Exposure looks great too; it's nice and bright but the water isn't overexposed like some waterfall shots can be. Nice work (y)
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
smr said:
Thanks for the comments and kind words ! I took another shot of the waterfall @ 18mm with a higher aperture...

IMG_0739 by smurkej, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Nice. I think your first image is the best. I like the 3rd image too.

Shame about the sky.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
some nice shots ...may be just a boost on the contrast but apart from that nice one ...where is this falls...
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
Great shots - I really like the first one especially. Pretty good for a first effort, you should be proud of those. Maybe try converting them to B&W for more impact?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top