Waterfall

From earlier this fall in NY.

So how'd you do it?

Beau1k wrote in post #11447581
So how'd you do it?

My camera did it, I just push buttons...



If you mean settings and gear and such, it was with a 1Ds2 and 24-70mm on a tripod with exposures from about 0.5 to 1.5 seconds, ISO 100 and apertures ranging from f/7.1 on the vertical shot to f/13 and f/14 on the other two.

If you are using some kind of auto feature on your camera, I'd suggest you take it down about a stop (+/- compensation). It's tough to find a balance between the white of the water and the shadows but the water is seriously overexposed in these shots.

You should consider shooting in CameraRAW if you are not already. That way, you would be able to rescue some detail in the highlights.

The colors around the waterfall really pop. Nice work.

I agree with most of the above comments...location looks good, fall colors are nice, but the water is severely blown beyond rescue.

Be sure you have highlights (blinkies) turned on in your camera's menu and check your histogram between shots...you'll have immediate feedback with regard to any overexposed areas whereby you can then adjust your exposure to compensate. Also, look into exposing to the right (ETTR).

I agree the water is a bit overexposed but you did capture the great surrounding colors. Looks like a great location, can you share it with us?

disjecta wrote in post #11448182
If you are using some kind of auto feature on your camera, I'd suggest you take it down about a stop (+/- compensation). It's tough to find a balance between the white of the water and the shadows but the water is seriously overexposed in these shots.

You should consider shooting in CameraRAW if you are not already. That way, you would be able to rescue some detail in the highlights.

I agree with that 100%. You did a great job exposing for everything but the water. Using RAW can editing it from that can help... or get some filters and work it that way.

very nice! love the saturated colors

disjecta wrote in post #11448182
If you are using some kind of auto feature on your camera, I'd suggest you take it down about a stop (+/- compensation). It's tough to find a balance between the white of the water and the shadows but the water is seriously overexposed in these shots.

You should consider shooting in CameraRAW if you are not already. That way, you would be able to rescue some detail in the highlights.

I was only joking with my earlier response. I'm quite familiar with my camera and shooting RAW.

I did however forget that the last adjustment I made to these in LR3 was bumping the overall exposure a bit for printing, which resulted in the highlights looking blown on a computer monitor.

I brought them back down for monitor viewing and re-exported, the versions now posted above should look better.

sodalis wrote in post #11452795
I was only joking with my earlier response. I'm quite familiar with my camera and shooting RAW.

I did however forget that the last adjustment I made to these in LR3 was bumping the overall exposure a bit for printing, which resulted in the highlights looking blown on a computer monitor.

I brought them back down for monitor viewing and re-exported, the versions now posted above should look better.

Some people reading this thread, myself included, can really get confused when they see your images posted in post #1 and then read comments by disjecta and others and then wonder what the heck they're talking about. Just a suggestion but if you want to post an updated image, it might make more sense to embed it in a new post rather than updating the original. That way, you maintain the continuity of the discussion.

PacAce wrote in post #11453498
Some people reading this thread, myself included, can really get confused when they see your images posted in post #1 and then read comments by disjecta and others and then wonder what the heck they're talking about. Just a suggestion but if you want to post an updated image, it might make more sense to embed it in a new post rather than updating the original. That way, you maintain the continuity of the discussion.

I agree with this. I learn from other's threads as well as my own, and it helps me learn to see both the before and after.

sodalis wrote in post #11452795
I was only joking with my earlier response. I'm quite familiar with my camera and shooting RAW.

I did however forget that the last adjustment I made to these in LR3 was bumping the overall exposure a bit for printing, which resulted in the highlights looking blown on a computer monitor.

I brought them back down for monitor viewing and re-exported, the versions now posted above should look better.

I don't know...they still look severely blown to me, especially the first image. The pool of water below the falls is just a white blob void of any texture or definition. IMO, the shutter speed was way too slow where you now have "cotton candy" water.

argyle wrote in post #11455687
I don't know...they still look severely blown to me, especially the first image. The pool of water below the falls is just a white blob void of any texture or definition. IMO, the shutter speed was way too slow where you now have "cotton candy" water.

dito...

they are much better... but they still look off in a few ways... i really feel that while the highlights are not as blown out you still had the shutter wayyy too long... and the water is just overdone. either see if you took a faster shot or go back if u can and shoot it again. i feel that there are extremes (shooting a waterfall handheld and getting stop motion on the water, and then this case) and they should usually try to be avoided unless aiming for them.

I have never been able to get a good waterfall picture in my life. I wouldn't be saying that if these shots had been taken by me.