Okay, here's a closer view of "Dan Falls", the big fan that appears over the top of "Mark Falls", which is in the other Henline post. Very picturesque, but a bit tough to photograph in terms of extremes of light. I worked the right side of this quite a bit to bring out some detail.
This really is an image from a year ago - my small number of 2006 images of this falls were marred by some huge water spots on the lens... ugh. Comments and suggestions welcome, as always!
An interesting waterfall, but the comp isn't doing too much for me. The foreground doesn't pull me to the falls. There are a couple hot spots in the water, but a decent exposure overall.
I was wondering what the upper falls looked like in that first post. I think Mark Falls is a little more picturesque, but you have a nice creamy look to the cascades here. If you have an overexposed image from the same location, you can blend them in PS to get more shadow detail. But I mostly focus on the falls, not the shadow area on the right.
Thanks for the comments, Ryan and Mike. I'm still practicing the blended image technique, but I'll try it on this one - I definitely have a pretty wide set of bracketed exposures to draw from. Here's a second image of the falls, taken from the base of "Tripod Rock", which is the classic view (if there is such a thing for a remote falls!). Anyway, this one has a more picturesque foreground than the first image -- also was shot in June 2005.
I think the original shot is pretty nice. It definatly is a different perspective and I like how the two sections of the falls come together at the bottom. On the second one, I think the rock in the left foreground is a little dominate.
Discussion
5 repliesThis really is an image from a year ago - my small number of 2006 images of this falls were marred by some huge water spots on the lens... ugh. Comments and suggestions welcome, as always!
Tom
Olympus E-300, 11-22mm lens at 11mm, 1/2 second
Tom
Tom