A rainy day on the creek, low light. My plan is to go back and explore more when the rocks are not so slippery. Never used to worry about that when I was younger! I did use some noise reduction in vibrance because of iso but it was minimal.
Specific Feedback Requested
Not sure which composition is stronger? I usually try to isolate and eliminate in many images as they seem to be stronger but here I also like the foreground on the left and think it adds to the comp. I also wanted to present the texture of the falls rather than the usual smooth silky one. Thoughts on comp and any others of course?
Technical Details
Is this a composite: No
Sony alpha 7 III, 110mm, f/13, 1/1000 sec, iso 12800
The fast shutter speed is effective. The clarity is a nice change of pace. Composition-wise I think somewhere between these would work. A little more greenery on either side, but not too much. The one small tree takes a more prominent role in the crop and I like it a lot.
Unquestionably the second image is better. The white falls on an overall darker canvas is very effective. In fact, it’s arresting. I’m not sure if you processed the first image to have to sunny rocks and leaves be darker that it would equal the second image. I like the composition of the first very much as well but as a total image the 2nd is more successful in my opinion. In the first image the greens pull you to the left but in the second they are perfect placed as an accent.
Less is more, I prefer the second image for the reasons already stated by others above. In addition, in the first image the LLC is very soft and OOF, which doesn’t really work well for me. I’m a stickler for sharp foregrounds I guess. and as @Kris_Smith noted, I like how that small tree gets emphasized in the second image, it makes a nice counterpoint to the waterfall.
I’m all in for the first rendering. It tells me more about the setting of the stream and thus plays down the water. The second is good, but has a different context as it emphasises the water.
Thank you for the shutter speed. That’s not to say the long-exposure images are not great photos, many here are, but it’s refreshing to see water stilled.
The background is beautiful. Dark, but rich with detail providing a lot of atmosphere.
Switching back and forth between the two I’m even more inclined to the first. The more horizontal crop makes the difference.
Thank you all @Kris_Smith@paul_g_wiegman@Igor_Doncov@Ed_McGuirk for commenting and opining on the version which is stronger. I did struggle with the dof in this image due to the light level. Going back on a nicer day!
My preference is for the original composition because I like the way that the vegetation frames the cascading creek. I also think that the color adds to the appeal of the image.
While I know that you were trying to freeze the motion in the water, I think you lost quite a bit of detail because you used such a high ISO. I recommend that you shoot the scene at base ISO so that you can capture all of the detail in the scene and then shoot a second image at your preferred shutter speed. You can blend the two images together and paint in the water using a layer mask in Photoshop. You generally don’t have to worry about noise as much in water since it consists of brighter highlights (although you would still have some noise in the shadow areas in the water.
Edit: Normally I find that a shutter speed between 1/4 and 1/20 sec offers a nice balance between conveying the motion of the stream while still retaining detail and texture in the water. I usually shoot several frames at different shutter speeds and blend in the one that gives me the result that I like the most.
I agree with @Brian_Schrayer about shooting at base ISO and using bracket and blend to bring in the water however you want it to look. Even skilled application of noise reduction can’t compensate for what ISO 12,800 does to color and detail. In another post, I discussed in detail how you can do what Brian is talking about.
If you are using super high ISO to get fast shutter speeds because you are hand-holding in low light, that’s a different matter. The technique Brian mentions is best done from a tripod.
