Back Modifications (5)
Views 93 Unique 31 Award Shortlist   


By Bigpoolman
Comments appreciated.

I used a telephoto to zoom into the falls, placing the main swirl in the water at the bottom left corner to lead into the falls themselves. The shutter speed was slow enough the bring out the colour in the water as it flowed over the fall.
Some selective processing in PS and basic edits in LR.

Thanks for looking


Tags: Winter Dales Swaledale Landscape and travel 2016 WainwathForce

Amazon Kindle Unlimited Offer: 1-Month For FREE!


dudler Plus
17 1.6k 1849 England
17 Jan 2017 7:36AM
This is fascinating, in terms of showing how you work and how I perceive things...

There's exactly the same sense of 'I want to compose slightly differently' that I get looking at yoru wideangle shots.

That means that there's something systematically different in how we see the world, so that you should probably discount much of what i say if others don't say the same! You should simply see my comments as offering an alternative view.

And so I want to see more of the patterns in the water in the near distance, and less separation between them and the waterfall. And I'm not sure it can be done - or maybe it can. I was thinking 'longer lens, slightly lower, further back' - physically impossible? Or a viable alternative?

There are two lovely and interesting areas, and relatively dead space between them, and at the top of the frame. The white water works really well for brown and peaty water!
Robert51 12 7 122 United Kingdom
17 Jan 2017 7:59AM
These kind of views makes everyone get the camera out and you can see why. Like John said we all have different ideas about this shot and it's always worth taking a few shots taking in both wideangle and portrait type images.

The mode I didn't want to change too much so I have reduce the tint in foreground but kept it in the falling water. A little edge darkening and sharpening to bring out the detail. I then kept your bank part of the image which work well with the changes. Hope you like it...

mrswoolybill Plus
14 2.8k 2408 United Kingdom
17 Jan 2017 8:04AM
This is an unusual image. Partly it's unusual because it's a milky water image that appeals to me! Generally I prefer to see some texture, structure within flowing water, I don't just want an amorphous haze. This works because of the discolouration in the water, combined with the various directions of flow. Very well seen.

It also works because of those fabulous abstract swirls of foam in the foreground water. With both the discolouration and the foam, I prefer not to think about the cause... But the effect is striking.

Regarding John's comment about separation, a slightly lower camera position would have given the empty water less space in the frame.

My problem I think is that there is a bit too much going on, my eye doesn't know where to settle. There are three areas of interest - starting with the swirls, immediately in front of us; then the waterfall; then the strip of land above, which is the least important but it's where the eye travels to as it explores up the frame. So first off I would like to see this with a slice cropped off the top.

Then, I know it's heresy, but I'm going to try cropping off the waterfall too. Because I reckon there's potential for a damn good abstract in that foreground. My second mod will be simply a suggestion as to something else to look for next time you see this sort of effect - taking it on its own would require a much faster shutter speed, say 1/125 second or faster depending on the water flow.

I will just brighten a bit overall as I think Robert has done.
17 Jan 2017 9:03AM
Thanks all for your comments and mods. Plenty of food for thought and helpful as always.

I thought that I would try something different this time so took the telephoto from a higher position than previous visit. I agree it does give some dead space between the swirls, which are a real feature of this particular fall, and the falls themselves. I was also undecided as to how much of the strip of land to crop off and don't think I took quite enough.

I'll have a go at the abstract next time I am that way, thanks for the idea. I've probably only ever taken 1 or 2 abstracts so about time I gave it a go.

I have uploaded a different version as a mod (can I do this?) just so you can contrast it if you wish.


mrswoolybill Plus
14 2.8k 2408 United Kingdom
17 Jan 2017 9:11AM
Thanks for the second image, it appeals to me because of the addition space allowed to the foreground swirls and less 'dead' space. A camera level well below (or sometimes well above) normal eye level will generally give a more interesting composition, because it gives emphasis to the shapes that we don't actually see as we walk along in life.

I have to go out, I'll look at the second image in detail when I get back.
mrswoolybill Plus
14 2.8k 2408 United Kingdom
17 Jan 2017 12:36PM
Back home again... I really like the lower, broader view, I've added a very quick modification. I simply separated the rock and vegetation from the water. I lightened shadows and brightened a bit overall in the former, and then darkened the water and boosted contrast a bit. Then a tiny bit of unsharp mask.

This is the view that I would want to return to. Your second image was taken at 1/10 second, I suspect that the swirls are not actually moving very fast but they are such strong foreground interest that it would be worth trying a faster shutter speed in order to get them crisp.
17 Jan 2017 2:41PM
Thanks Moira, the changes have helped. I don't use unsharp mask (tend to use smart sharpen or hi pass), so not familiar with its effects. Did you sharpen the whole picture or just the rocks / trees?

I also prefer the landscape version on this waterfall, thought I would try something different with the telephoto.


paulbroad 13 131 1293 United Kingdom
17 Jan 2017 4:55PM
Unsharp mask is generally ore aggressive than smart sharpen and I use both. The former if things need some stick, the later for almost every other image on the basis that digital images are invariably slightly soft. I have found that images from my Fuji CSC bodies need less sharpening than the EOS files - lack of a low pass filter I would think.

See to be getting a lot of milky water the moment. I tend to prefer sharp water but the extreme foreground does add a dimension to this.

mrswoolybill Plus
14 2.8k 2408 United Kingdom
17 Jan 2017 5:15PM
I used unsharp mask on the foreground. It's possible to use it on an isolated area, it's simple which suits my fluffy female brain, and it can be pushed from almost imperceptible to What the hell's gone wrong here...

Apart from the default sharpening in Camera Raw, which I sometimes include, sometimes omit, I never add sharpening until I am preparing a resized image for the internet (or an image for printing). My standard settings for uploading here, which I picked up from an article a while ago, are:

Radius: 1.0 pixel
Threshold: 0
Amount: start at 30% and see what happens as you increase. For a 2000 pixel image I rarely go above 60%.

Always go in close to monitor the effect, particularly on potential problem areas. Beards, feathers, diagonal lines, horizons...

And (heresy!) I quite often prefer to go without added sharpening, particularly for moody b&w.
dudler Plus
17 1.6k 1849 England
17 Jan 2017 10:57PM
I love the second version you've posted. Really strong.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.