Yet another woodland shot; it's probably not very web friendly, oh well.
This was taken in the spring of 2006, after a few days of very heavy spring rains. Since that time, I haven't witnessed this particular scene again (with this intensity); though I have been back every spring since. Ironically, the area is typically bone dry, and one would never even think such an event would possibly occur. I guess it's just another reminder that nature is never static. Thanks for looking.
Interesting shot, Joel...certainly an unusual perspective. I like the FG a lot; I'm trying to decide on the inclusion of the water in the BG...I like the sense of depth, but for some reason it seems as though that spot of the image is pulling my eye a bit. I'll have to come back and look at it again later.
Posted by Jack Graham on September 25, 2008 at 11:39 PM
Joel, Ditto on the comments on the coloration etc... very very nice... however for me, what makes this image ( and I am sure you shot it taking this into consideration) is the lack of merges in the hardwood trees. Merges can make or break an image and this is outstanding!
5 stars!
JG
Posted by Darren Huski on September 26, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Very very nice. This is a great image at somewhat of a different view than most would take it. I also like the view using the 135. It would have seemed natural to maybe jump in with the 75 but I like the moderate wide view here.
Jack, yes, I try and avoid mergers, but sometimes they're simply unavoidable. I lucked out that the trees were cooperative in this instance.
Darren, you bring up an interesting point. Yes, the temptation is typically to shoot wide. However, I often find that dense woodland scenes oftentimes end up overly cluttered if wide lenses are used (not always of course). In this case, the waterfall seemed to offer the most compelling foreground, and including more surrounding it did little to visually add to the image - in my opinion of course. I was with a friend who was shooting a DSLR, and he shot the scene with a wide angle (28mm full frame equiv.). I guess it worked for him.
Also worth noting: Since ultra-wides are currently so popular, shooting with longer lenses is one way to get a slightly different take than the masses.
Posted by Toni Lankerd on September 28, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Love the lush greens and the exposure you used on the falls, Joel!
Posted by Darren Huski on September 28, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Joel- You are right about the wide being popular and that longer is probably better in the forest. Since I am usually out in wide open country I tend to reach for the wider optics. My goto lens is the 75mm for the 4x5. Although on wide open prairie country I go long and stitch panoramas as the best way to show it.
I have been using a 17-50 on the XTI (roughly 28-80) but feel constrained and have ordered a 10-20mm for the digital. That will get me wider and means I'llbe going to a 50D rather than a 5D Mk2.
Posted by Chuck Beatty on September 30, 2008 at 8:04 PM
Discussion
11 repliesThis was taken in the spring of 2006, after a few days of very heavy spring rains. Since that time, I haven't witnessed this particular scene again (with this intensity); though I have been back every spring since. Ironically, the area is typically bone dry, and one would never even think such an event would possibly occur. I guess it's just another reminder that nature is never static. Thanks for looking.
Technicals: Tachihara 4x5, Fujinon 135mm, Fuji Provia 100f, Polarizer, 81b warming
5 stars!
JG
Jack, yes, I try and avoid mergers, but sometimes they're simply unavoidable. I lucked out that the trees were cooperative in this instance.
Darren, you bring up an interesting point. Yes, the temptation is typically to shoot wide. However, I often find that dense woodland scenes oftentimes end up overly cluttered if wide lenses are used (not always of course). In this case, the waterfall seemed to offer the most compelling foreground, and including more surrounding it did little to visually add to the image - in my opinion of course. I was with a friend who was shooting a DSLR, and he shot the scene with a wide angle (28mm full frame equiv.). I guess it worked for him.
Also worth noting: Since ultra-wides are currently so popular, shooting with longer lenses is one way to get a slightly different take than the masses.
I have been using a 17-50 on the XTI (roughly 28-80) but feel constrained and have ordered a 10-20mm for the digital. That will get me wider and means I'llbe going to a 50D rather than a 5D Mk2.