Derrel
Mr. Rain Cloud
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 48,211
- Reaction score
- 18,936
- Location
- USA
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
#1 is the best camera placement and composition of all the shots. I would kill-file all the others, and concentrate on WHY #1 is the best photo. First off, you have an ACTIVE subject--moving water. It has actual physical movement. The VERTICAL camera orientation shows the water coming toward the camera's position. The water is allowed to literally fall, or drop, as it moves through the frame, from the top to the bottom. The BOTTOM RIGHT CORNER of a photo is one of the absolutely strongest positions for an element in cultures where people read left to right and top to bottom (most of the Western world). Because the shot was done with a slight wide-angle focal length, the closest objects appear significantly larger both physically, and therefore psychologically, than the background items. The focal length when shooting wide-angle is very critical!!! SO is the exact, precise location of the tripod in relation to the closest objects in the scene, as well as the overall scene. A foot closer or two feet closer can make a HUGVE change in the size of the closest items.
"White advances, dark recedes"--yet another one of those horrible,horrible visual language things I learned about in university art classes; the cascading water pouring and crashing over the rocks in the lower right hand corner is rendered as light or white tones; the nondescript coniferous trees in the background tell us this is a European/North American waterfall, and not one in say, Central America. The dark background recedes because, doggone those artistic principles, it is DARK. The "light advances, dark recedes" principle of design makes this image work pretty well and makes the cascading water really stand out. Even though it is blurred from too slow of a shutter speed paired with inadequate camera support, this shot has a lot going for it.
It's a crying shame that the camera is moving. The shutter speed is almost perfect for the water volume and flow rate!!! The exposure is however, over (too much light hit the sensor). If you can do a re-shoot at the location, I would set the camera's self-timer to 10 second delay, and try a series of shots, working very carefully on improving the EXACT placement of the tripod and the precise compositional areas included within the frame. There is much to like about #1, even though it is technically flawed, it's a good building block. A re-shoot could REALLY help you nail this and create a lovely waterfall/cascade shot.
"White advances, dark recedes"--yet another one of those horrible,horrible visual language things I learned about in university art classes; the cascading water pouring and crashing over the rocks in the lower right hand corner is rendered as light or white tones; the nondescript coniferous trees in the background tell us this is a European/North American waterfall, and not one in say, Central America. The dark background recedes because, doggone those artistic principles, it is DARK. The "light advances, dark recedes" principle of design makes this image work pretty well and makes the cascading water really stand out. Even though it is blurred from too slow of a shutter speed paired with inadequate camera support, this shot has a lot going for it.
It's a crying shame that the camera is moving. The shutter speed is almost perfect for the water volume and flow rate!!! The exposure is however, over (too much light hit the sensor). If you can do a re-shoot at the location, I would set the camera's self-timer to 10 second delay, and try a series of shots, working very carefully on improving the EXACT placement of the tripod and the precise compositional areas included within the frame. There is much to like about #1, even though it is technically flawed, it's a good building block. A re-shoot could REALLY help you nail this and create a lovely waterfall/cascade shot.
