Beginner Waterfall Advice

Messages
54
Name
Vicky
Edit My Images
Yes
I am going on a walk in Wales next weekend and there are alot of Waterfall. I love photos of Waterfalls and have tried a few times in the past but I never seem to be able to get it right. Any advice on the matter would be great.

I have a Canon 600D basic lens and a Zoom lens, so nothing special.
 
Get yourself a polariser and a ND filter.

The polariser will take the glare off the water and the ND filter will slow your shutter speed.
Saying that if you are doing the walk in waterfall country, much of the walk is in the shade of trees, so simply closing down your aperture to f16 and ensure you are at your lowest ISO should slow your shutter speed enough to blur the water.

Of course you will need a tripod.
 
Thanks for your advice. I have a tripod and I have bought some filters, never used them before though. Is there a set shutter speed time to get the milky effect without burning out the photo?
 
Not really anything from a second. The longer the shutter speed the more you will get the milky effect.
Personally I don't like it too milky as it looks unnatural, but you'll need to experiment with that to suit your tastes.

I would shoot in aperture priority, choosing your preferred aperture and see what the shutter speed is. If it's to fast then add an ND filter. Obviously check for highlight clipping after your shot and adjust as required.

Remember a polariser will take the glare off the water and will also slow your shutter speed by a stop, so a polariser maybe all you need.

This was a 10 second exposure.

https://flic.kr/p/zpsJcE
 
Last edited:
Thanks I love that photo! I will look at getting a polariser before I go next week.

Fingers crossed I will get something close to yours!
 
With waterfalls you really need to watch your highlights, as the white parts of the waterfall will clip very easily. Chances are that you'll have to expose to stop those clipping and bring the shadows up a bit later in post.

Personally I like waterfalls around the 0.5-1 second mark, any longer and they stop looking like water I think. Each to their own though, so go for whatever speed suits you :)

Where abouts in Wales are you going?
 
Thank you. Here is another from a different angle and different time of year.

https://flic.kr/p/fFwhCw

Unfortunately this is the furthest falls from the car park, but because it's a bit further, it's usually free from hordes of tourists :) and IMHO is the better of the falls along the route.

There are other more remote falls, but require some more intense hiking and climbing.
 
Thanks very much, I think the timing is where I possibly have been going wrong in the past! Going to the Brecon Beacons got a 9 mile route which I have been told has quite a few waterfalls. .
 
Elliot where did you go to take your photos? Might have to make that my next visit :).
 
Thanks very much, I think the timing is where I possibly have been going wrong in the past! Going to the Brecon Beacons got a 9 mile route which I have been told has quite a few waterfalls. .

Awesome, I went to the Brecon Beacons two weeks ago and took photos of the Sgwd Gwladus and Sgwd Ddwli falls among others, which are a short walk from Pontneddfechan. Hope you have fun!
 
Last edited:
Play with exposures! If you use S mode (Tv in Canonese IIRC!) and go as slow as you can before the aperture hits the maximum (actually, stick to f/16 or wider otherwise you'll probably end up with diffraction softness creeping in too much). Look at the results and check for blinkies (blown highlights) as well as seeing what speeds give the effect you're after. As said, polarizers and ND filters will get you slower shutter speeds at wider apertures.
 
Most people tend to go a bit mad with the milky water effect and have it looking more like smoke rather than water. Once you have found a good location try a range of different shutter speeds from about half a second onwards. It doesn't cost you anything if you don't like the effect.

Agree that a lot of long exposure images tend to be too long, or longer than they need to be. I think a lot of the problem is ten-stop ND filters, the default choice for most people, and given our often overcast weather, that dictates very long exposures whether you want them or not. There are a few six-stops NDs about now that may be a better all-rounder.

BTW, some of the best waterfall etc shots I've seen have been double exposures blended in post processing - one quite short, without a filter, with quite clearly defined water; then a second much longer blurry/milky one (y)
 
BTW, some of the best waterfall etc shots I've seen have been double exposures blended in post processing - one quite short, without a filter, with quite clearly defined water; then a second much longer blurry/milky one (y)
You can also exposure blend/stack a larger number of shorter exposures to get any level of "motion blur" you want... and you can make it infinitely selective with masking, no filters required.
(Bottom layer at 100% opacity and all subsequent layers are a division of 100%... i.e. 2nd layer up is 100/2= 50%, and 10th layer is 100/10=10% opacity)
 
So I have been and I had alot less time than I planned to take photos at each waterfall. Neither of the following have been edited. I am not 100% happy with the composition but i do prefer the first one. Any tips would be greatly appreciated.



[url=https://flic.kr/p/LdibEW]
[/url]
 
IMO they're better but still have a slight colour cast. Since you have allowed image edits, I've taken the liberty of very simply using the Remove Color Cast tool in PSE 12 and putting the dropper over the foot of each. IMO, the second could do with a little cropping to remove the chap to the left of the image and the group to the right since they add nothing to the scene. The people behind the fall add a sense of scale and depth.

28433922853_73a5955eee_z.jpg
29018848546_f0bb040009_z.jpg
 
If you do a long exposure, always looks cool in black and white. That's what I like anyway.
 
Back
Top