Discussion in 'Critique Forum Archives' started by ArkansasBandit, Feb 4, 2007.
To me it seems like something is missing in this picture but I can't put my thumb on it.
An interesting subject prehaps.Its not really a water fall.Its not a flood.Just water and rocks.Don't feel bad I do the samething, take pictures of stuff just for the heck of it for practice. It helps with compositin and use of the camera also it makes you work with different forms of light a reflection.
Maybe just a little more "punch" ... more colours, more contrasts. And after you did the crop I suggested, i.e. the one that made you lose the far bank of this river, the biggest rock has moved into the dead centre of your frame. To have something that eye-catching (and the rocks are the most eye-catching things you have here) in the dead centre of a frame is a tad boring. If you should decided to crop in further from the left, maybe up to that second biggest rock, and again from the right ... hang on. I was doing some "screen-cropping" by holding two sheets of paper to the left and the right to test my ideas, but you say your pictures are ok to edit ... so I might as well show you?
Oh well, I had to find out that whatever I do: that one rock stays in the dead centre of the frame, and I feel there are some rocks and flows that you would not want to miss.
Have a look at my quick-quick edit, all the same, will you?
Now on Tyson's old screen it might look too dark - don't know what screen you have, ArkansasBandit? - but it sure has more colour "punch" to me (but I fear I overdid it in the contrasts, yes, sure did, so forget about this edit, it is no good, really).
i'd think that a pic depicting flow, should be shot in that direction. i.e. this should be a portrait shot, not a landscape shot. (vertical vs horizontal)
i didn't see the original shot lafoto is talking about, but i think i would have shot the larger rock closer and to a side.
also i might have shot it at a faster shutter speed, only because you completely smoothed out the water around anything that wasn't "a rapid" and lost all the texture in the surrouding water. that technique is good to reflect stuff or to show the calm of things, but with the moving water, i think you need more "action"
Separate names with a comma.