I spent a night up at the Crystal River Mill last week. I went up there to capture the Mill in it's Spring Glory. I wanted high river CFS and a show of different shades of limes and greens. I also wanted a wide and different perspective of this iconic location. I was not dissapointed but rather elated with the conditions. The water was just roaring over the Mill area. It was incredibly loud and misty and overall intense. I marvelled at the swirling logs in the rough water at the base of the mill; never venturing outside their little comfort zone.
I shot the image on a very steep dirt slope, under some trees that provided me with a nice survival grip. I wanted to show the river running away from the mill.
After shooting the Mill in winter, I can understand the lack of Mill shots for that season due to access problems. However, I have no idea why Spring gets neglected.
Two image blend, 14mm, F16. Canon 5d II, Nikon 14-24.
I'm want to submit this one to the NPN Landscape Critique Gallery and want to make sure the blend looks smooth and natural.
Gorgeous shot, Kane. Uncommon perspective, great conditions and super comp. A few nits are that the Mill could be lightened up to reveal more detail; in fact, the entire image feels a little dark. I'd experiment with a levels adjustment. Only exception is that I'd keep the lower right as dark as it is currently.
Blend looks very good. Saturation feels a little punchy, but not over the top.
In the super-minor nit category, but worth considering given the high quality of the image... I'd clone or heal the bare branches hanging over the mill's roof. The reflected light on the broad-leaf plant at the far left edge is mildly distracting.
Great work. Should get a good reception in the Landscape gallery.
Posted by Todd Caudle on June 22, 2011 at 10:10 AM
Perfect blend and a really fresh view, Kane. Never seen a shot looking down-river like that, but I'll bet we'll see some popping up in the future, now that you've shown how great a view it is.
You'd get more action on the Landscape gallery, but maybe this is more appropriate for Man & Nature?
Posted by Rod Chandler on June 22, 2011 at 10:32 AM
Gorgeous shot Kane. I like the other two as well but this one is the killer.
I love this perspective! The roaring waters lead one's eye effortlessly throughout.
It's great to see something fresh from this place. Your 'development' is pitch perfect, too. Completely natural looking throughout. As Rick noted, the bare branches in the sky above the building could stand to be 'pruned'. Otherwise, this is good to go!
And as Todd noted, you'll have to post this in the 'Man & Nature' gallery instead of the 'Landscape' gallery.
I have to chime in here about this perspective. I've seen folks shoot from this area but haven't seen the results. I really like it. Great job in post too!
Posted by Pam Colander on June 22, 2011 at 1:00 PM
Looks like you accomplished your goal admireably Kane! I get a bit blase with icon shots sometimes but your take here is very refreshing and powerful. I get a true sense of the rushing water with your POV which is accented by the subtle inclusion of the swirling logs in their "safe haven". Processing looks perfect...a strong M and N EP contender
Posted by Bill Brennan on June 22, 2011 at 1:06 PM
Another positive comment about the blend, the composition and the emotional draw of the power of the water.
Great shot man. The comp is excellent here, and I really like the motion in the water. Some of the greens seem a bit high on saturation, so you might take a look ta selective areas to bring those back a bit. Blend looks fantastic though.
NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think I might have to hang up my hiking boots and live the mountains thru you and Jack that way I never have to leave my living room, it would be so much easier.
Great comp, aside from the overhanging branches in the ulhc. I have to strongly disagree with the blend comments though (i wish there were an objective way to measure this, cause it really puzzles me how people can see this as 'natural looking') The fg is too bright and the bg too dark--it looks HDR. The water should not be as bright as the sunlit trees in the bg. Id bring up the sky brightness a bit and drop the water brightness a bit to balance. you can add a bit of contrast to compensate. The water also looks a tad cyan to me, i might warm the WB a tad.
NICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think I might have to hang up my hiking boots and live the mountains thru you and Jack that way I never have to leave my living room, it would be so much easier.
Posted by Art Escobado on June 22, 2011 at 5:01 PM
Sweet image! I know what you mean about the slope as I've shot from there before while slipping and sliding in the fall. I can hear the roar of the falls from your shot. Very, very sweet. Have you thought about going back in the fall and getting one from the same perch?
Do I really have to post this image in the Man/Nature catagory? There's not much action over there.....
Ron, yes I'll be going back later this year. I've got the Winter, Spring and now I need the best one yet, Fall!
At any rate, I feel good about this one thanks to the excellent feedback. I'll prune some trees in PS first.
Stan, that "HDR" comment freaks me out . I'm one of those guys that will blend if needed to match my memory of the scene. I was not trying to convey a typical HDR feel to this image. Considering it's only a two image blend (foreground/Sky) it won't take long to lighten the sky. BTW, I do agree that maybe the sky could benefit from about a half stop of light. As for the foreground appearing too highlighted, I think I'll keep that piece and call it Artistic Interpretation.
Posted by Jack Garrett on June 22, 2011 at 10:54 PM
Well, I totally disagree that this looks HDR..sorry Stan. This is a fantastic image and great artistic interpretation...I can feel the moment, hear the roar of the water and see the total beauty in this image. Bring this to the shindig Kane!!!!
Posted by Dan Walters on June 23, 2011 at 12:56 AM
Amazing image! Love the color and the blur in the water!
Posted by Kalin Wilson on June 23, 2011 at 1:36 AM
Great shots, Kane! The first one is especially awesome and it's nice to see a fresh perspective like this. HDR didn't cross my mind until reading Stan's comment, even then I still think it's a good blend... maybe his monitor is super bad ass or something. Maybe the sky and light could be a touch brighter, but the shaded foreground seems perfect to me. Especially if you're printing this, you wouldn't want that foreground any darker.
I would be tempted to brighten up the mill a bit, to try to bring it more to the center of attention.
Looks mighty fine to me. After mentioning HDR, I can sort of see it, but I think it's nice as presented. Actually, my first impression when I looked at it a while back was to lighten the mill building a little.
Posted by Darren Huski on June 23, 2011 at 9:39 AM
Like the high water flow. give it a much different take than normal here.
Wonderful comp and the high water really does make a huge difference over other similar comps I've done at lower water and others I've seen from the same viewpoint
I could not disagree more with Stan's assessment, Kane. I'm among the first to point out unnatural looking blends or any HDR type 'unrealism'. This is just about how one's eye would see the scene, IMO.
Also disagree with the calls to lighten the mill a touch. On a calibrated monitor, I can see plenty of detail in the building. However, lightening it a touch to bring it more toward the center of attention is a matter of taste.
Posted by Pam Colander on June 24, 2011 at 1:19 AM
I have to say that while Stan gives very well thought out and inciteful critiques, this one was overly harsh IMO. I think the scene is quite realistic as presented...just sayin'.....
Not being a landscape guy, I probably haven't seen as many shots of this location as others, but I have seen a few and don't recall seeing anything similar to this. Love the perspective Kane. I personally don't think this looks too "HDRish"
Me Harsh??
No, i just have a super badass monitor
Seriously, youre right Kane its really just about a half stop in the sky, which is darker than the fg water, that should do the trick. The bright portion of the water has a histogram luminosity median of 200, the snow on the hill is 224--thats too close.
Oh--and by 'HDR' i didnt mean the ugly sort of HDR we all love to hate, i just meant that IMO digital blends make us more susceptible to going too far in balancing the DR--some DR is a good thing, its why film is still real popular among some
I really like this as much as most others, but i can't tell if there's water on the lens or just mist from the river in the narrowest part of the river (just above the mond of FG grass). It's drawing my eye there to the point where it's distracting. Otherwise, i think you've covered the flow (pun intended) of the scene nicely!
Amy, that's a continous cloud of mist your looking at. The large version does a better job conveying the cloud of mist opposed to this version, where it does appear lke a water droplet on the glass.
Discussion
33 repliesI shot the image on a very steep dirt slope, under some trees that provided me with a nice survival grip. I wanted to show the river running away from the mill.
After shooting the Mill in winter, I can understand the lack of Mill shots for that season due to access problems. However, I have no idea why Spring gets neglected.
Two image blend, 14mm, F16. Canon 5d II, Nikon 14-24.
I'm want to submit this one to the NPN Landscape Critique Gallery and want to make sure the blend looks smooth and natural.
http://www.kaephotography.com/photo/swirly-logs/?subject=news
http://www.kaephotography.com/photo/spring-power/?subject=news
Blend looks very good. Saturation feels a little punchy, but not over the top.
In the super-minor nit category, but worth considering given the high quality of the image... I'd clone or heal the bare branches hanging over the mill's roof. The reflected light on the broad-leaf plant at the far left edge is mildly distracting.
Great work. Should get a good reception in the Landscape gallery.
You'd get more action on the Landscape gallery, but maybe this is more appropriate for Man & Nature?
And relating to Sarah's current topic, this is a great example of a fresh take on an icon.
It's great to see something fresh from this place. Your 'development' is pitch perfect, too. Completely natural looking throughout. As Rick noted, the bare branches in the sky above the building could stand to be 'pruned'. Otherwise, this is good to go!
And as Todd noted, you'll have to post this in the 'Man & Nature' gallery instead of the 'Landscape' gallery.
Bill Brennan
Ron, yes I'll be going back later this year. I've got the Winter, Spring and now I need the best one yet, Fall!
At any rate, I feel good about this one thanks to the excellent feedback. I'll prune some trees in PS first.
Stan, that "HDR" comment freaks me out
I would be tempted to brighten up the mill a bit, to try to bring it more to the center of attention.
Good job.
Also disagree with the calls to lighten the mill a touch. On a calibrated monitor, I can see plenty of detail in the building. However, lightening it a touch to bring it more toward the center of attention is a matter of taste.
No, i just have a super badass monitor
Seriously, youre right Kane its really just about a half stop in the sky, which is darker than the fg water, that should do the trick. The bright portion of the water has a histogram luminosity median of 200, the snow on the hill is 224--thats too close.
Oh--and by 'HDR' i didnt mean the ugly sort of HDR we all love to hate, i just meant that IMO digital blends make us more susceptible to going too far in balancing the DR--some DR is a good thing, its why film is still real popular among some
Amy, that's a continous cloud of mist your looking at. The large version does a better job conveying the cloud of mist opposed to this version, where it does appear lke a water droplet on the glass.