Tiffany Greens

Tiffany Falls in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
I’ve recently hit a wall in my post processing and continually second guessing the direction I’d like to take. I tend to fall in the middle ground when it comes to how heavily I process an image. (My first post in the critiquing gallery. Really looking forward to the feedback!)

What technical feedback would you like if any?

Any feedback appreciated.

What artistic feedback would you like if any?

Any feedback appreciated.

Pertinent technical details or techniques:

Nikon D850 - 19 mm - ƒ/14 - 1/30 sec - ISO 64
(This is a focus stack of 5 images, some minor cloning of highlights in the upper trees and orton effect)

If you would like your image to be eligible for a feature on the NPN Instagram (@NaturePhotoNet), instagram: @chrisnoronhaphoto
You may only download this image to demonstrate post-processing techniques.

Chris, welcome to NPN! I hope you are having a good time here!

I think you have done a mighty job with the focus stacking. I also think you have processed this pretty well except perhaps for the brighter lime green portion at the top center of the image. I can see that it’s the sunlight coming through the foliage but maybe changing the hue a little bit or extending it down a little more will make it less of a distraction. Another suggestion that is more subjective is with regards to the foreground. It feels a little awkward to me as there is not a lot of strong elements that hold my eyes there to anchor the foreground. But this is more of a personal taste.

I am looking forward to seeing more of your pictures!

1 Like

Welcome to NPN, Chris. The processing looks just fine to me as does the five image stack for DOF. The greens look spot on and I like that bit of mist toward the top of the falls as it adds some nice atmospherics to the scene. Did you happen to get any closer to the falls? The reason I ask is that I think that would be a stronger image, but that is just my personal preference. I look forward to more of your posts and critiques.

1 Like

Welcome here Chris. Personally I like the distant objects much more than the foreground. I also don’t feel the need to show the falls in their totality, from top to bottom. Here’s how I would do it.

1 Like

Welcome to NPN, Chris! Thank you also for jumping right in and posting critiques. I appreciate your comment on my recent photo.

There is a lot that I like about this image. I like the idea of how you have framed the waterfall, which by the way is a great subject with the terraced cascades and great lines. I also really like the greenery above the waterfall. To my eye your processing looks great as well.

The one critique that I would have is that although the foreground is effective in framing the waterfall, I don’t find it to be as interesting as the rest of the scene. There is quite a bit of clutter with all of the branches which I find a bit distracting. You have a good idea and if you could find a spot where you could fill the foreground with more of the green plants that would work. Alternatively, I do like the suggestion to move in a bit closer to the waterfall. If you did that based on what I can see in this frame I would suggest actually minimizing the foreground and dedicating more of the composition to the waterfall and the beautiful trees above it.

1 Like

Welcome to NPN, Chris, and wonderful first post for critiques. First thing I always notice for waterfalls is the chosen shutter speed for the falls and yours is perfect IMHO. Of course, everybody has a different idea of perfect, but I really enjoy the syrupy appearance of the falls with nice texture. I think everyone can identify with your conundrum of how involved you want to process an image because I think we all go through that phase many times, especially after all the new developments in software over the past couple of years.

My opinion is similar to some of the others in that you seem to be a bit too far out from the falls, and for my taste, the falls seem a bit too centered. I downloaded your image and played with it a bit and will post it below. I basically cropped it some to make the falls appear closer and more to the right. I cloned some of the minor clutter (the only non-minor clutter was the hot spot in the right mid-frame; a strong reflection off the log in the stream). I cropped a lot of the bright area off the top but I dodged the remaining greenery to bring that lighter spot back into the image as I thought that was a strong positive element to the image. I also dodged (very lightly) some of the leaves in the FG and in a couple of other branches just to make them SLIGHTLY brighter. I also VERY SLIGHTLY increased contrast in the falls just to bring out the falls more. All of these adjustments were small, but I think they make a cumulative positive effect, but you be the judge there; after all, it’s your image and you have to please yourself first and foremost.

I’m posting my revision and your original for comparison, along with my adjustment panel in CS6.

1 Like

Thank you @Adhika_Lie @Ed_Lowe @Igor_Doncov @Brian_Schrayer and @Bill_Chambers for the warm welcomes and the wonderful feedback of this image. I really appreciate you time! It’s great to get a different perspective and a fresh set of eyes, to make you see things you may have overlooked. I have a great direction to consider in reworking this image and processing images in future.

My biggest gripe with this shot was the foreground and although I did like how it framed the scene, I can see now how it competes with the subject (the waterfall).

I did take a few shots closer to the falls, but at that point the Selfie Squad (a group of 15 people) showed up and made it even more of a challenge to get a clean image.


1 Like


A little late here, but still wanted to comment. I think this is a wonderful image and honestly beautifully processed.

As I’m sure you’ll guess… we’ve all been there and currently reach those moments when we’ve reached a limit on processing - I know I have. It’s hard to draw the line when one thinks they’ve crossed that “gone too far” line. Having said that, results always speak for themselves. Regardless of your limits or struggles processing, I must say you produced a fine image.

Of course, considering the “critique” forum - there are usually some tweaks that often improve an image. In this case, I think these are small tweaks - and I think Bill’s rework is a great example. I really like his small changes.

Regarding the composition, I had this off-the-wall impression. The near/far composition works well, although folks have brought out the primary concern is that we have competing interests. What I thought of was a technique they use in movies/tv, where the camera shifts focus between foreground and background (vice versa) to show/emphasize the story line or to guide the viewer… Not sure it that makes sense, but I get that sensation here where the viewers attention shifts between the two main elements. I really think Bill’s edits help reduce that effect. Again, not sure if that makes sense…


1 Like

Wow, what a magical waterfall, very well processed and perfect shutter speed. I do really like the idea of peering through the foliage at this fairy tail scene but I would concur with the about the branches being a bit of a distraction.

1 Like

Thanks @Lon_Overacker and @Blake_Randall! Really appreciate the feedback.

Lon, your explanation of the near/far composition makes perfect sense. It wasn’t as noticeable to me until it was mentioned here.