The subtle soft tones suit the image well, quite atmospheric to say the least, love the hint of pink in the sky and reflections. Not sure about the rock in the foreground...I find it a little distracting, perhaps you could have cloned it out. But hey, that's only my humble opinion
Mike

Sharpness....before you've finally closed the image go to "enhance" unsharp mask, then the settings need to be around...168 to 175 (amount) then somewhere between 3 and 5 (radius) and then 1 (threshold). That's assuming you're using PS. See if that works, it's the setting I usually use.
On this shot...you'd benefot from a ngrad filter to help control the exposure of the sky

Mike

A nice subject with some fine detail in the tiny stamen. However the image would benefit from a much tighter crop. The leaves dominate the shot and distract the viewer form the flower. Maybe a tight crop leaving just the last two leaves would be more appealing. Also had you altered your viewpoint to allow us to see more detail of the flower head...whilst not straight on, at a slight angle for us to see a hint of the centre. When using a black background, I often have to use the selection tool to highlight all the background and then increase the saturation and decrease the light. This results in a much more solid background for you. Hope this helps a little?
Mike

I do quite a bit of work with water and long exposures so here are a few ideas and a little critique for this shot. (others may have different opinions or methods)
Because of the nature of the shot (long exposure) a tripod is essential as is a circular polariser. The CP should be rotated in such a way that it reduces any reflections from the light on the water which will result in a nice shot of the stones under the water. A wide angle lens will result in the opportunity for foreground interest. Shooting in bright sunlight can result in over exposure on the rushing water on which the light is shining. A low viewpoint is always an advantage as it allows you to get that foreground interest in that I mentioned.

Looking at your shot, you've got that bright sunlight I mentioned, this can be compensated for in post production a little. It looks like you have shot looking down onto the subject...maybe had you got down even lower (and probably got wet and dirty) you may have had a more pleasing shot. I find it's always quite difficult getting the result "just right" when working with small waterflows like this. Maybe my technbiques are better suited to larger waterfalls.

Hope that helps a little, have a look at some of my shots using long exposures either in my portfolio on EPZ or on my website: www.colouredimages.com, in particular the waterfalls section

Cheers

Mike

I've gotta agree with Alan...the levels and curves could do with altering to boost the contrast. Too many splash mark on the lens also distracts for me. I would also look at cropping or perhaps next time concentrating on composing to shot so that we are looking purely at the lower fall and the view through the hole...that way you would have eliminated the strong light from the top of the current shot. Hope this helps?

Thanks for allowing me to crit....

Mike

Nice detail in the flower but there's a distracting patch on the bottom left of the background. If you use the magic wand to highlight the background (using 20pixels) then alter the saturation and darkness to get a uniform black throughout. Just a bit of friendly CC to try 'n help

Mike

Pin sharp focus and perfectly "framed". This should do extremely well, it's a beauty
Mike

A lovely shot Hugh but if I may offer a bit of friendly cc....the light to the left is subtle and effective. with the use of reflectors and or white or silver card you could have balanced the light more evenly to show off the right element of the flower even better. I find that side a little too dark. I use a combination of natural daylight and reflectors or 150 watt halogen lamps (again with reflectors) or a "daylight" bulb which aims to replicate natural light as opposed to using ordinary bulbs which can give off a false warm light. A slight change of angle of the rose towards the lens would still give us the overall view that you have achieved but it would also give us more of a view of the interior.

Hopefully you will find this helpful, if not, carry on what you're already doing it's still good
Mike

Good use of the "prop" but if I may....it may have produced an even more favourable result had you propped the rose up more and perhaps at a slight angle to the lens so that we could see more detail in the centre. You can also see an element of light in the top right which could be eradicated by either cloning or using the wand tool to select the whole background and increase saturation to make it uniform black throughout. Just trying to help a little
Mike

Good movement in the water Jane however, I find that branch in the foreground a little distracting. I have been many a time and found a more favourable view to be from the bank you have shot from but I got right down near the first stone and got a view across the river (retaining movement with a long exposure) and looking up to a gate. I have also included the loo block which you have done here. I just feel this doesn't really do it justice. Only trying to offer a little constructive critique
Mike

Very nice indeed
Mike

PS: Can I please make a suggestion......without the border, duplicate layer, gaussian blur at 250 pixels then alter the blending style to "overlay" and opacity to 65%, merge down, tweak the levels very slightly and increase saturation too. I've just tried it and the result is a much richer blend of colours. Don't get me wrong, this is already a lovely image. I used this a few times with some recent still life uploads and the results were really quite pleasing. Hope you don't mind, just a little c&c for you to use

Yes it's been done before...I alone must have uploaded 20 similar uploads. This for me is good but maybe you might have been better being lower down so that the foreground rock was more or less at lens level. That would have reduced the effective gap between the rocks and the middle distant reflection of the trees...that just seems a little too much space at the moment. A tweak to levels and curves may also give the shot a little more "punch" to it and this more impact.

Hope the cc helps a bit and don't forget, that's only my opinion
Mike

The bloom itself is lovely, very photogenic. However the background cloth can still be seen...did you use flash? I also find the foliage distracts the eye from the main focus which should be the bloom. Have a look at your e-mail...I've sent you my take on this one and I would be interested to see what you think. Don't forget, this critique is intended to help your photography/processing skills...you already get plenty of "hits and votes"

I have cloned out all the foliage and then selected the background with the magic wand and set at 20 pixels. Once highlighted I have gone into adjustments....then colours then hue/saturation. Alter the lightness to -100, click OK and that saturates the background making it solid. Added a border and hey presto. Now I know not everyone likes my flowers and that fact that they seem to float in mid air...I'm just offering you critique on how you could (in my mind) improve an already good shot still further.

Cheers

Mike

A lovely rose well captured. I presume you have used flash on this one which shows all the detail well. However, it has also shown detail in the background. There are a couple of ways that I would avoid this....tripod mounted camera, position the flower in natural light and use a longer exposure without flash. The alternative is using this shot in PS select the background and alter the colour saturation to make the background solid and hence not show up the contours of the cloth. Hope you appreciate I'm only trying to help!
Mike

It has immediate impact...most shrooms that we see are excellent close-ups perfectly isolated from their backgrounds. Both versions give a great sense of scale and perspective which I guess is what you were after given your title. The ring-flash version definitely shows the shroom off in better light (oops). maybe a selective tweak to levels and curves may lift the colour slightly and give it even more oomph. Only my opinion and who am I to offer such advice. Only wish I could get down as low as is needed for a shot like this...sadly my recent op wont allow. Oh well maybe next autumn?!
Mike

I like this one Christine, natural pose of these lovely little creatures and despite bright sunshine; very well controlled exposure against the bright blue sky. You could always use the dodge tool on that eye...range would be highlights and exposure to around 8%. Alternatively create a duplicate layer and make a similar amendment and experiment with either highlights or shadows and alter the exposure, then you could alter the opacity of the layer. Hope this helps and I am by no means an expert on PS but I know I could make the above work. Someone may be able to offer an easier solution
Mike

PS just had a go at a mod using the above having downloaded the large version...doesn't really work that well but would work better on the original image for sure

Hi Baz

only just seen that you've uploaded the "unadulterated version"...V1 has more impact but I still feel that the blurred field takes a little away from the shot. I would love to see another version where you have kept the format as taken (without the blur) but then worked on the levels etc to give the original even more impact..maybe life the colours as you have in your blurred version. Don't get me wrong, just trying to offer a bit of CC
Mike

Nice theme Ronnie and well linked in. If I dare...about the chrysanth.....a white or silver card positioned below the flower would have balanced the light out evenly and made a very good flower shot even better. Still a very lovely capture though
Mike

Classic isn't always the best option. I too have photographed the swirls at these, the lowest of all the falls. I usually shoot from the left hand side not from where you have shot. This is very effective and is helped by some super light. I've gotta add...a long exposure well controlled given that spot of light. It'll do well I'm sure
Mike

The composition looks good Ronnie. However...have you cloned some flowers out from the bottom of the shot? It appears quite messy and I can see greens and reds that look like you've tried to get rid of something. Sorry about the honesty but that's how we and I learnt when I first made similar mistakes
Mike