Claim 3 FREE professional prints with Fujifilm
Comments

I think you're faced with an exposure nightmare here..bthere's such a contrast between the bright patches of sky and the dark undergrowth that a single exposure just can't cope with this range of brightness. Hence here there are burnt-out patches of sky and water at the bridge and areas on the right in almost total shadow.
You've exposed well for the moving water itself, and if it's the effect you want it's worked quite well. I think the only way to avoid the problems I've mentioned would be to take a couple of different shots (on a tripod of course) one brighter for the shadow area and one darker to hold detail in the patches of sky - and then blend them later. (it's possible that if you'd shot in raw there would have been enough latitude to create these two different shots from the one raw shot).
Just my honest thoughts, hope they're some use
Stephen
You've exposed well for the moving water itself, and if it's the effect you want it's worked quite well. I think the only way to avoid the problems I've mentioned would be to take a couple of different shots (on a tripod of course) one brighter for the shadow area and one darker to hold detail in the patches of sky - and then blend them later. (it's possible that if you'd shot in raw there would have been enough latitude to create these two different shots from the one raw shot).
Just my honest thoughts, hope they're some use
Stephen

This is a lovely scene, Paul, and Stephen has told you why the image doesn't work well. My eye is drawn to the red bridge, which has a beautiful reflection. I think I would have gone for a closer shot of that. I find it to be the most interesting part of the image. This way, you could have avoided the dark tree on the right, but would still have had to cope with the strong light. Easier to handle, though.
Pamela.
Pamela.

Hi,
I have added some blue sky and lightened up the right hand side of your photo. The trouble is you have done such a good job with the slow shutter speed on the water that it takes the eye of the viewer to the bridge, which again you have done a good job with the reflection, from then on the viewers eye is led right out of the frame. I could not do anything with that. It is a really nice scene maybe you could re shoot it?
I hope that I have been some help to you.
Mick
I have added some blue sky and lightened up the right hand side of your photo. The trouble is you have done such a good job with the slow shutter speed on the water that it takes the eye of the viewer to the bridge, which again you have done a good job with the reflection, from then on the viewers eye is led right out of the frame. I could not do anything with that. It is a really nice scene maybe you could re shoot it?
I hope that I have been some help to you.
Mick

Definitely 2 shots here Paul as has been stated above.
One thing to remember also is the effect the colour Red has when it appears in an image, - it attracts the eye right away, so it works best if it appears on a third, as a focal point.
To show how it can actually make two separate images that work independently, Ive loaded two mods, one of the right of the image, the other the left. And I just filled in the white sky with trees. If you werent there, you wouldnt know that trees should not be there.
regards
Willie
One thing to remember also is the effect the colour Red has when it appears in an image, - it attracts the eye right away, so it works best if it appears on a third, as a focal point.
To show how it can actually make two separate images that work independently, Ive loaded two mods, one of the right of the image, the other the left. And I just filled in the white sky with trees. If you werent there, you wouldnt know that trees should not be there.
regards
Willie