This is the famous cascade in the Tremont section of GSMNP. It’s one of those shots that is featured by so many local and national photographers. I was initially resistant to shooting it because I couldn’t find my voice or “statement” that was personal a derivative or felt derivative/copied. As a side conversation, I’d be interested in others thoughts on arriving to an “epic” location and how people approach shooting it when you want to make your own personal statement. Well…I’m blabbing now…
For whatever reason, I’ve found that in my photography, I feel drawn to filling the frame and encourage a sense of direction or flow within the scene. I’m often seeking multiple places within the frame to rest the eyes and wander around. With that said, please comment on this image. I really like the basin in the RLC, but am not sure if it’s too close to the edge. Of course, any other thoughts or recommendations on composition, post-processing are welcome.
What technical feedback would you like if any?
What artistic feedback would you like if any?
Pertinent technical details or techniques:
(If this is a composite, etc. please be honest with your techniques to help others learn)
Nikon D810; 24-70 f/2.8 @27mm, f11, blended different exposures for light (2sec) and water (1sec) movement, ISO 50.
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.
Jim, when visiting commonly photographed places, it’s always a challenge finding a view that is your own. Personally, I’m not bothered if my “view” is either influenced by others or similar to others. In such a situation, I suggest enjoying being there for the actual experience.
I think the eye movement here works very well, with the strong cross frame, white water, the look up the creek and the nice glow in the distant trees. The weight of the dark forest in the upper right balances nicely with the weight of the big rock at the bottom. I would suggest a bit more burning-in of the brightest bits of white water in the lower left corner and at the mid-frame edge on the left. This looks like a fun place to explore the contribution of that big rock at the bottom.
This is a beautiful area and you captured this scene very well. I like the large bolder in the foreground and the overall water flow. The brighter area in the back works for me too. Thanks for sharing this lovely image.
Jim, you render the green leaves really well. I find the LR corner area super interesting with that tree right on the outflow almost anchoring the dynamic of the scene. I almost want a little bit more in the bottom to see more of the outflow?
I see the triangle on the LL corner from the water flow there a little bit problematic. I tried cropping that area and it feels awkward and imbalance, especially with the rock in the FG. I think one way to address it is to burn that area considerably and all is fine for me.
As for your side questions… I struggle with this, too. Most of the time I still shoot it any way… if not for anyone else, it’s always a good “target practice”.
This is really beautiful, Jim. The soft, flat light has opened up the details in the dark areas wonderfully. Your processing looks great. The composition works as is but I find myself wanting to see more of the front face of the prominent boulder. Perhaps there is good reason why you excluded. In any event a very fine image.
Thanks @Mark_Seaver…for your comments and critique on the image. I agree with you about the water as you pointed out. I will revise the image with these in mind.
Thanks @Dave_Dillemuth - I think you’re right about cutting off that edge of the rock. I have no specific memory of other distractions other than it’s kinda close to the bank I was standing on and may include new distractions. I’ll be back there in April and have another go at it as long as the flow is up and appropriate over the cascade…not always the case.
Jim,
This does have a nice flow throughout the image and the greens are flat out gorgeous with some nice detail in the shadows. I also like the details in the water with your chosen SS. It certainly is not a deal breaker, but I wish the FG boulder was not cut off. Of course I was not there so I am sure you had your reasons. As far as shooting the icon I do it anyway because there usually is a good reason for it being an icon. After that is done I will look around and try to find someway to put my spin on it for a different look or perspective. Anyway, this puts me right there in the Smokys. Beautifully done.
Classics like this are classics, even epic for good reasons, right? We all know this. And there’s no shame in trying to put your stamp on it. Here’s my spin on making these DTD (done to death…) scenes; it’s been my photography signature for 25 years, “capturing moments in time…” with the emphasis on “moments.” I don’t care how many times a scene has been photographed… that moment that you pressed the shutter release is a unique image - and its yours, never to be repeated, not even by you. Not to belabor this point, but I’m reminded of a photo buddy of mine from some 30+ years ago. We and several others in a camera club outing were photographing some hoar frost, cattails and just a wonderful little winter scene. I asked my friend why he wasn’t shooting it and he said because me and another already did and he didn’t want to repeat. Ok, that’s reasonable I thought - very noble not to want to copy someone else’s image. But then comes the realization some years later… haven’t seen or spoken with this friend in many, many years… I have this image and a print hanging on my wall 30 years later… and he doesn’t. Your moment in time is yours - and no one else’s, regardless if it’s a popular location.
And you’ve captured this one beautifully. I think your processing is excellent, love everything.
My only wish might be for more room a little left and bottom. I’m guessing though, and from what I recall from other images from here, you are pretty constrained with nearby trees, rocks, etc., and I suspect this was about as much room as you could get. So really, I think this works beautifully as presented.
What bothers me is the very obvious and rigid feeling L shape the river makes in the composition. It comes straight down, parallel with the left edge, then sharply turns to the right, parallel with the bottom edge. I wish it were more flowy to feel a bit more organic and not so geometrical if that makes sense. Also the big boulder in the bottom left corner is very distracting and bigger than most of the sections of the stream that are visible.
Jim, I’ll start by saying the processing looks outstanding here, I especially love the colors you got in the spring foliage, and the backlit glow at the top. The processing gives the image a very crisp and clean look.
In terms of the composition, I agree with @Eric_Bennett about the 90 degree in the river “breaking up the flow”. It may be subjective on my part, but I prefer to have water either flowing at the viewer, or the water leading to something interesting. Once the water “makes the turn” here it leads to a dark area and then out of the frame. I am also bothered by the rock in the LLC being cut off, this comes back to wanting crops to seem deliberate looking. It also bothers me that the rock partially covers the falls, which i consider to be the most interesting part of the water in this image.
This may have made it more of a tripod hole shot, but if I were here, I would have jumped or waded out to that rock and shot down the stream, making the little falls more prominent in the composition.
I have found this to be true in several NPN compositions. Well defined geometrical subjects with clearly defined borders really stand out and draw unwanted attention (unless that’s your intention). This is particularly true with those with straight lines and pointy vertices like triangles. However, I really don’t see it in the river and even after being made aware of it I am not drawn to it.
Thanks to @Eric_Bennett for your perspective and observations! Very interesting to see the composition from this geometric perspective that I had no idea was evident. Thanks again for bringing this to my attention. @Igor_Doncov - it would seem that you as well have had an unfavorable experience with this compositional observation even if you don’t obviously see it in this one. This is definitely eye-opening for me and great perspective.
The boulder in the LLC is a unanimous concern - not only for its visual weight compared to the cascade, but for its incompleteness.
@Ed_McGuirk - you’re observation about cutting off the cascade bothered me as well. Thanks again for your perspective and feedback. You’re right, being on the rock is the tripod-hole shot!
Again, I’m looking forward to returning this spring and will endeavor another effort at various compositions. Thanks again everyone!
I didn’t object to the Boulder for several reasons. It’s a great addition to the scene. In fact it may be the best part of the scene. Removing it results in a less interesting image. Yes, not having it fully exposed is not optimal but I reasoned that increasing space below the boulder would add darkness below the white froth on the right which would unbalance the composition. In fact just adding the full boulder and space below puts much more emphasis on the fg and renders the bg less relevant. Yet the fg doesn’t have enough interest to pull this off successfully. Shooting landscapes is always a compromise because nature rarely presents itself as
Personally, I don’t worry about how many times a scene may have been shot previously. If I’m there and want to shoot it, I do. In the end, everyone tells a different ‘story’ even if shot from the same spot. I’ve shot this scene a couple times and found my way out to the big boulder that seems a big part of the discussion here. Not the easiest place to get out to, but with some caution, it can be done.
As much as I like your desire to capture something unique, the overall composition doesn’t have strong appeal for me. Or maybe more accurately, the processing doesn’t support it as well as I think it might. And for me, it’s less about the ‘L’ than it is an overall sense of imbalance. The eye almost always is drawn to lighter areas of an image first, and here my eye travels right down the left side of the shot and turns hard right in the lower third…but all but ignores the dark area on the right. And I’m inclined to think that dark area is emphasizing the ‘L’ others have mentioned. But I do think that would be a relatively easy fix by opening up the dark shadowed areas on the right a fair amount.
