HI Everyone,
Thanks so much for all the nudges on my last set of Iceland waterfall images. I have, I think, three more to share, starting with this set from Selfoss. Coming from the PNW, I am a bit jaded by waterfalls, but this one runs perpendicular to the stream that feeds much bigger Detifoss, and that really intrigued me. I am sharing two images, and as always, I’m eager for a) thoughts on which composition is more pleasing, b) suggestions for improving either or both, and c) honest appraisals if either or both are just kind of not working at all.
Also, I tend to go through long phases of either bw or color, and Iceland has me going back and forth on a daily basis, so an perspective you can give on contrast, etc. is much appreciated.
(If this is a composite, etc. please be honest with your techniques to help others learn)
Both images are single images, shot at a modestly slow shutter (.6 to 2.0 seconds) with a neutral density filter and tripod, processed in Silver Efex and LR.
If you would like your image to be eligible for a feature on the NPN Instagram (@NaturePhotoNet), add the tag ‘ig’ and leave your Instagram username below.
You may only download this image to demonstrate post-processing techniques.
Well, they’re both spectacular. What a place! I like them both, for different reasons. The first because it shows the larger scene. Perhaps in the first, lightening the dark rocks in the LLC would be nice, as they drag my eyes down to that corner.
The second is really cool, because of the energy of the water. For me, it’s almost an abstract of the water textures. Cropped to 9:16, getting rid of that upper dark strip of land, would really make the abstract nature of it pop. I think some dodging and burning to bring out the falls more, while lowering the brightness at the bottom of the falls, would bring out the textures more. I did some quick edits (hope you don’t mind). There’s also a few sensor spots.
Thanks, Bonnie. I consider cropping off the ridge behind the falls but left it in just in case. I knew y’all would tell me if it needed to go and your edit convinces me to crop it as you do. I always appreciate a sample edit, so I am very grateful!
Oh. And the spots. Yeah, I’m due for a cleaning. Who knew Iceland was so dusty and windy!!
ML
I like them both, and I think B&W is a great way to go with both images.
While I like the intimate feel of image #2, it feels a little cramped at the top, I would like to see more above the tops of the falls, unless there is a distraction there.
I like the composition of image #1 better, it has more of a felling of depth. i lik ehow the rocks on the left lead your eye into the scene. But similar to @Bonnie_Lampley comments on image #2 , I think you could push the darks, and contrast a little harder in image #1 as well.
Thanks, Ed. I appreciate the feedback. The second image is cramped because of that blasted featureless sky that plagued my entire 9 days in Iceland. Here is the same frame, uncropped, not converted to b/w for comparison. I think I’ll go with Bonnie’s crop there.
Love both. The first one is fascinating to me - and here’s why. The standing wave(s) in the flowing center are fascinating, if almost unbelievable. To me the larger standing wave seems almost out of place, like it’s too big for the river and surrounding falls. Weird. but in a glorious, as only nature can provide, kind of way. With the first I do think there is room to play with some additional contrast with the b&w processing.
I really like Bonnie’s rendition of your second image. I think the contrasts and white/black are meant to be emphasized here.
Too bad about the skies and conditions. Oh well, you managed quite well despite that.
@Marylynne_Diggs, I’m glad you don’t mind sample edits. Your re-works look good. That blocky slope is sort of cool, from a geological perspective. Looks like weathered columnar basalt.
