Between the Trees

This is a pretty little scene, Luke, well captured in nice light and pretty fall colors. The ss looks fine to me, but the water in the LRC is a little blown out. Maybe you could try burning that area to retrieve some detail, or clone in some water from elsewhere (I just read this suggestion or processing hint in Dave's comment to Wayne's waterfall image). Re the ULC, all things being equal, it would be better if the creek came down from that area as opposed to starting in the middle of the frame. It might have also helped if the source of the stream (where it bends back to the right) was more visible instead of being blocked by the large rock.

It's a fine view, Luke, with some good, subtle colors (especially in the llc) and nice water flow. How much to "film out" the water strikes me as a personal/artistic choice. This is slower than I prefer, but it works well. My one critique is similar to Scott's, in that I find the flow leaving the frame too much to the side. However, it looks to me like there's a trade off here, as moving the camera to the right to get more of the flow coming off the bottom looks likely to cut off some of the warm leaves on the left and moving that nice rock along the bottom might or might not work out.

Thanks to you both. I have other images showing this waterfall and the larger one which is out of frame to the right. However, this view removed the foreground and LLC which I think adds a lot.

Also, the water in the LRC looks a bit blow on one of my monitors (I have 2 here at work) and it looks perfectly fine on the second and I remember it looking good when I processed it and not blown at home, but I do like that cloning suggestion which I also saw on Wayne's image.

Regarding your feelings about LLC ... Trust the Force, Luke!

This is a nice pleasant forest scene which you have captured very well. I somehow feel it's a bit 'busy' but can't come up with any changes to reduce that any longer. I really like that green plant on the left because it seems to give me an anchor to hold on to. My preference is for a faster SS even if the water had not been blown out because the water beneath the surface is usually so beautiful. My own preference would be to cool the entire image just slightly because I like the color tones of a shady forest. I'm on the fence about those trees at the very top. My eyes keep being drawn to them. But I sort of like the suggestion it makes of light coming through, between them and on to the creek.

Beautiful scene, Luke. I like the composition as is. My personal taste USUALLY would be for the main subject (waterfall) to dominate the composition instead of sharing it with another element, like all the colorful things in the LLC. If something else takes up that much space in the composition, it should be very strong, which is of course, subjective. By having the water predominantly on the right side, it gives up some of its importance here, and I think the LLC elements, while beautiful, do not provide a point of interest that is strong enough to compete with the waterfall, so they both lose out IMHO. I would rather see some very strong subject with a waterfall as a background, or a beautiful waterfall with some other nice element included in the setting, but one of them should be THE subject. But it's hard to criticize such a pretty scene, especially when any suggestions for alternative compositions would probably involve getting wet, climbing trees or ladders, or using a flying drone!

As far as shutter speed goes, that's personal. I USUALLY use faster shutter speeds (faster than 1 second, depending on the speed of the water, the distance from the camera, and how much "structure" the water has). What I like is to preserve the structure and texture of the moving water as we see it. It's a balance between what I regard as two opposite artificial looks, which you might call camera tricks: One is "frozen" water with a fast shutter speed; and the other is "milkshake" water with a very long shutter speed. I think people normally see and remember something between these two extremes. I think some motion blur illustrates the flow we see, but very long shutter speeds obliterate the character of the water, transforming it into some sort of blob or fog. From frozen water to oozing milkshakes, and anything in between, it's all a matter of taste, but I think the middle ground celebrates the subject more, while the two extremes celebrate more the equipment and the "cleverness" of photographer using camera tricks.

I like your composition as it is, Luke. I agree some of the high values in the water look a tad hot, but the color is nice there, as well as the in the image overall. The smooth water makes for a nice sense of flow.

--P

This looks like a beautiful location to sit and enjoy for a while. I think the shutter speed works well, but I can certainly see the argument for retaining more detail with a slightly faster shutter speed. It may just be due to compression, but it looks like some of the bright highlights are a little blown out in the water.

A very nice forest scene Luke and I like the flow of the water through the scene. The water flow looks fine to me maybe a touch bright though. I wonder if you darkened the rocks lower left and upper right it would focus more attention on the falls. Very nice as is though. Well done.

A very beautiful forest scene. Beautifully composed and als well processed.