First go at long exposure waterfall

[jsecordphoto]

or use luminosity masks, which will give you the most control and would probably be the easiest way to mask blown out highlight areas

 

[mattpayne11]

So, for waterfalls it is always personal preference on how silky you want it to look. I like to vary it depending on the mood of the scene, personally. I think it is OK to try both and see what feels better for your vision. You also can always experiment by doing multiple exposures from the same vantage at different shutter speeds, including or excluding ND filters and a CPL (I always shoot waterfalls with CPL, personally)... and blend them in Photoshop manually.

 

[James Baranski]

So, for waterfalls it is always personal preference on how silky you want it to look. I like to vary it depending on the mood of the scene, personally. I think it is OK to try both and see what feels better for your vision. You also can always experiment by doing multiple exposures from the same vantage at different shutter speeds, including or excluding ND filters and a CPL (I always shoot waterfalls with CPL, personally)... and blend them in Photoshop manually.

LOL that is beyond my education. I am looking forward to learning

 

[JacaRanda]

2 & 3 for me Very nice 1st attemps.

 

[KmH]

2 by fore me, if you fix the white balance so the cascading water is white rather than blue.

 

[sleist]

I would have loved #1 over all of them had you given the top some room to breath.
As it is, it's a very unnatural border and, as a result, creates a sense of visual discomfort.

 

[James Baranski]

I would have loved #1 over all of them had you given the top some room to breath.
As it is, it's a very unnatural border and, as a result, creates a sense of visual discomfort.

Relax Kimosabe, it is a first run on long exposures. Perhaps read the thread..

 

[sleist]

Sorry. I'll keep my opinions to myself from now on.

 

[thereyougo!]

I would have loved #1 over all of them had you given the top some room to breath.
As it is, it's a very unnatural border and, as a result, creates a sense of visual discomfort.

Relax Kimosabe, it is a first run on long exposures. Perhaps read the thread..

Wow. Do you want honest constructive criticism or someone to blow smoke where the sun doesn't shine? I agree with Sleist that the first image look like it might have potential but the crop is too tight and the foreground has little interest. You needn't have shot at f/22 here. The 25 second have flattened the foreground too much so there is no shape to it. I would look at reshooting looking at focussing a third of the way in at f/8 or f/11 to get the exposure below 10 seconds so the foreground has some shape. Better still get it under 5 seconds.

With waterfalls I use half a second as a starting point. As others have said the optimum exposure time will depend on the flow of water.

 

[James Baranski]

I would have loved #1 over all of them had you given the top some room to breath.
As it is, it's a very unnatural border and, as a result, creates a sense of visual discomfort.

Relax Kimosabe, it is a first run on long exposures. Perhaps read the thread..

Wow. Do you want honest constructive criticism or someone to blow smoke where the sun doesn't shine? I agree with Sleist that the first image look like it might have potential but the crop is too tight and the foreground has little interest. You needn't have shot at f/22 here. The 25 second have flattened the foreground too much so there is no shape to it. I would look at reshooting looking at focussing a third of the way in at f/8 or f/11 to get the exposure below 10 seconds so the foreground has some shape. Better still get it under 5 seconds.

With waterfalls I use half a second as a starting point. As others have said the optimum exposure time will depend on the flow of water.

I appreciate the F22 advise. I was thinking the same. If you read the initial post you will read why it was cropped so tight. I am just looking to learn how to take long exposures bud. Who cares about the border it is a 10 pt thin border anyway. I started the thread to learn how to do this....

 

[AvianStewardess]

(I'm new around here)
My thought process: Where's this person from because that looks awfully familiar? Oh! Chicago. Boy, I wonder, being one born-raised-and-matured on Illinois soil (too many towns to list), could it be?

Thanks for putting keywords on your Flickr image. Waterfall Glen!!! Ever get a shot of the deer?

 

[James Baranski]

(I'm new around here)
My thought process: Where's this person from because that looks awfully familiar? Oh! Chicago. Boy, I wonder, being one born-raised-and-matured on Illinois soil (too many towns to list), could it be?

Thanks for putting keywords on your Flickr image. Waterfall Glen!!! Ever get a shot of the deer?

Not yet, It was my first shoot out there but many years ago i saw many white deer from Argon national labs

 

[thereyougo!]

I would have loved #1 over all of them had you given the top some room to breath.
As it is, it's a very unnatural border and, as a result, creates a sense of visual discomfort.

Relax Kimosabe, it is a first run on long exposures. Perhaps read the thread..

Wow. Do you want honest constructive criticism or someone to blow smoke where the sun doesn't shine? I agree with Sleist that the first image look like it might have potential but the crop is too tight and the foreground has little interest. You needn't have shot at f/22 here. The 25 second have flattened the foreground too much so there is no shape to it. I would look at reshooting looking at focussing a third of the way in at f/8 or f/11 to get the exposure below 10 seconds so the foreground has some shape. Better still get it under 5 seconds.

With waterfalls I use half a second as a starting point. As others have said the optimum exposure time will depend on the flow of water.

I appreciate the F22 advise. I was thinking the same. If you read the initial post you will read why it was cropped so tight. I am just looking to learn how to take long exposures bud. Who cares about the border it is a 10 pt thin border anyway. I started the thread to learn how to do this....

No matter what effect you are looking to learn, you still need to make the composition work. This can be even more critical with water flow. If there is foliage that gets in the way of an ideal composition, then you need to use your feet and move where there is a better composition. That being said, where you are using long exposures you will always get foliage moving in the wind. It's unavoidable.

 

[mattpayne11]

I would have loved #1 over all of them had you given the top some room to breath.
As it is, it's a very unnatural border and, as a result, creates a sense of visual discomfort.

Relax Kimosabe, it is a first run on long exposures. Perhaps read the thread..

Wow. Do you want honest constructive criticism or someone to blow smoke where the sun doesn't shine? I agree with Sleist that the first image look like it might have potential but the crop is too tight and the foreground has little interest. You needn't have shot at f/22 here. The 25 second have flattened the foreground too much so there is no shape to it. I would look at reshooting looking at focussing a third of the way in at f/8 or f/11 to get the exposure below 10 seconds so the foreground has some shape. Better still get it under 5 seconds.

With waterfalls I use half a second as a starting point. As others have said the optimum exposure time will depend on the flow of water.

This is one of the hardest things to learn as a new photographer. I used to get actively upset when people would critique my photos, now I openly welcome it. It is the best way to learn, especially if people are willing to go into a lot of detail on how to make it better. I've found now that most people want to be paid to do that these days.

 

[James Baranski]

I would have loved #1 over all of them had you given the top some room to breath.
As it is, it's a very unnatural border and, as a result, creates a sense of visual discomfort.

Relax Kimosabe, it is a first run on long exposures. Perhaps read the thread..

Wow. Do you want honest constructive criticism or someone to blow smoke where the sun doesn't shine? I agree with Sleist that the first image look like it might have potential but the crop is too tight and the foreground has little interest. You needn't have shot at f/22 here. The 25 second have flattened the foreground too much so there is no shape to it. I would look at reshooting looking at focussing a third of the way in at f/8 or f/11 to get the exposure below 10 seconds so the foreground has some shape. Better still get it under 5 seconds.

With waterfalls I use half a second as a starting point. As others have said the optimum exposure time will depend on the flow of water.

I appreciate the F22 advise. I was thinking the same. If you read the initial post you will read why it was cropped so tight. I am just looking to learn how to take long exposures bud. Who cares about the border it is a 10 pt thin border anyway. I started the thread to learn how to do this....

No matter what effect you are looking to learn, you still need to make the composition work. This can be even more critical with water flow. If there is foliage that gets in the way of an ideal composition, then you need to use your feet and move where there is a better composition. That being said, where you are using long exposures you will always get foliage moving in the wind. It's unavoidable.

I am going back in 4-6 weeks when the land is not barren. I live in Chicago so hopefully soon the leaves and vegetation will grow for a wonderful shot. There is NO foliage.