In the Flow III

Gallery: LandscapePosted June 21, 2010320 views29 comments

I say "III" because this is my third time photographing this tree in the Merced River at Happy Isles. And I don't know about you, but so may times that very first image is always the one that we can never duplicate... but I thought I would post this anyway. Some may recognize the scene.

This is probably less than 50 yards or so down stream from the image currently posted by Cory just a few images back from this one. Mine was captured in early May at the start of peak flow in the Merced from the spring runoff, but I believe Cory was there a couple weeks after me.

Anyway, something a little different with this one. The light was pretty flat and I was envisioning a little b&w at the time. But in my processing I used a little technique that I learned from our own Chris Chamberlain. Of course I shoot color film and have to convert in PhotoShop. After adding the b&w layer to the file, I changed the blending mode to saturation, and dropped the opacity to 50%. What this does is allow some of the original color to bleed back in to the image. It's subtle, but I'm wondering if this works for anyone, or if you can even tell. Thanks for the tip a while back Chris!

I'm also curious to know if the water itself, the motion, shutter speed, etc. make up for the many tiny branches in the tree that are blowing away in the wind. Do those blurry branches and leaves detract? Blurs show better (or worse) in the large version.

Thanks very much for your honest comments and critiques.

4x5, Nikkor 300mm, f/32 @1s

Lon

Comments

29 comments

Comment posted by Kah Kit Yoong on June 21, 2010 at 2:55 AM

This is wonderful, has that Japanese painting look about it. The blurred branches don't bother me as most of them are sharp. I also like the duo tone treatment here. The only thing I'm unsure about is whether cloning out that rock might be an advantage.

Registered on September 27, 2006, 636 Posts, 10682 Comments

Comment posted by Doug Roane on June 21, 2010 at 3:12 AM

This is an absolutely beautiful intimate image, Lon. Your selective comp works well, as does the shutter speed and processing

There is enough sharpness throughout the tree that the motion blur from the branches does not distract at all, and maybe even enhances the image some.

Registered on December 12, 2008, 213 Posts, 2226 Comments

Comment posted by Mark Metternich on June 21, 2010 at 3:22 AM

Very cool image Lon. Works well.

Mark

Registered on June 19, 2009, 276 Posts, 6240 Comments

Comment posted by Nick Bristol on June 21, 2010 at 8:31 AM

I actually like this quite a lot. I think the water looks fantastic and the blending you did really works imo. I agree with Kah Kit about the Japanese feeling and think it would even lean more towards that without the rock. That said, I really like the rock (center right) and think it adds alot to this image. Most of the branches are sharp and look so good that I wish they all were, but it does convey all the motion going on the way it is, so I think it works fine that way too. Nice work! Has a great feel.

Nick Bristol
Lone Rock, Wi

Registered on February 1, 2004, 752 Posts, 14140 Comments

Comment posted by Bill Chambers on June 21, 2010 at 9:09 AM

This is sweet Lon. This processing tip is new to me, but I really like it. Comp looks good and chosen shutter speed is excellent. The blurs don't bother me at all since the primary branches are nice and sharp. Excellent work IMO.

Registered on April 10, 2005, 753 Posts, 21216 Comments

Comment posted by Greg Cope on June 21, 2010 at 10:05 AM

Lon, this is fantastic. The blur in the tree doesn't bother me a bit, given how sharp the majority of the tree is.

Registered on January 22, 2007, 212 Posts, 2737 Comments

Comment posted by R.Bill Moser on June 21, 2010 at 10:43 AM

This one works well for me. The blending you did here work for me. The comp looks good to me and i also love the chosen shutter speed.
Excellent work in my opinion.

Registered on January 29, 2010, 285 Posts, 4281 Comments

Comment posted by Luis Argerich on June 21, 2010 at 10:52 AM

Hi Lon,
Fantastic photo, the subtle colors and shapes are incredible.
I specially like the rock that balances everything in the picture.
Fantastic.

Registered on December 22, 2009, 91 Posts, 1349 Comments

Comment posted by Reno DiTullio on June 21, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Beautiful, Lon. The comp, exposure, flow, are all excellent; looks and "feels" like color to me. The partial rock on the right frame edge is kinda distracting to me, I would like to see it cloned out which would further isolate the pointed rock. Well done

Registered on November 14, 2003, 130 Posts, 1644 Comments

Comment posted by Ed Cooley on June 21, 2010 at 1:01 PM

I have seen your previous versions and liked them but I think this one works nicely as well. I like the processing and water motion a lot. The branches moving don't detract in my opinion, they add a sense of climate to the flatter light which helps substantiate the whole feel of the image.

Registered on August 22, 2007, 45 Posts, 547 Comments

Comment posted by Kyle L. Krause on June 21, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Lon,
I think it has a strong composition. You know I've always liked this shot. But I'm leaning towards the original shot, when you and I shot this two years ago. I think the Blur from the tree detracts it for me. Still a great Image.

Tioga was a last minute trip. Lots of flowers and snow at the higher elevations!
I'll send you some pic's

Registered on June 15, 2010, 29 Posts, 605 Comments

Comment posted by Lon Overacker on June 21, 2010 at 2:09 PM

Thanks for the comments so far folks! I appreciate it.

I hadn't considered cloning out the rock, but now I'm confused as to which one. Kah suggested cloning out the rock, and I'm thinking the most notable one that looks kinda like a shark's fin. Then Reno mentions the partial rock on the right frame edge. Which rock? I guess it could be both depending on ones point of view and personal preferences.

One of the great things about getting feedback here on NPN. In my own working on this image, I had not considered either of those rocks. So thanks for the suggestions!

Lon

Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments

Comment posted by Cory Freeman on June 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM

It would seem this is a popular tree as well! I saw Michael Frye's version awhile back. I don't recall seeing this one, I'm sure I walked right by it though! I like your version here, it feels dark and somber, kinda like the last water image of yours I commented on. Is that your intent I wonder? I think your shutter speed is just right as it conveys a sense of power to the water which is important for the theme here. the whispy cotton candy look would not convey the ferocity and unrelenting power of the water. It took me awhile starring at this to see the blurred branch. At this size I don't think it negatively effects the overall image, but at a larger print it might look totally different, hard to say.

As others have noted, I like the overall scene better w/out the rock, but it doesn't really bother or detract with it there. I wouldn't clone it out though. I wonder if it would've been visible during the days of peak flow? Probably not. So could always go back during a time of pk flows and get it without if it bugged you at all.

I do find myself wanting a little more detail in the shadow of the trunk, but not much more than what you have here. I'm sure it would show up in a print as you have it now though.

that's my thoughts for better or worse, overall a damn fine image!

oh, I was in the valley btwn june 1-7, at happy isle the 2

-cory

Registered on December 16, 2003, 107 Posts, 1341 Comments

Comment posted by Morris McClung on June 21, 2010 at 7:29 PM

This has a very oriental feel to it. The blur is not a huge distraction to me.

Registered on May 7, 2007, 670 Posts, 19650 Comments

Comment posted by Mark Pelton on June 21, 2010 at 7:40 PM

Lon, I like this, both the comp/scene and the very slight color you have added back. On the large version the blurry branches are noticeable, but not really a deal breaker for me. Well thought out image.

Registered on November 25, 2003, 380 Posts, 4647 Comments

Comment posted by Nick Bristol on June 21, 2010 at 7:51 PM

Lon, I was refering to the shark's fin rock (good name for it). I do think I like it better left in the image. The one on the very right edge does not bother me either. I could go either way with that one. Probably a pretty tough call on this, but it does work nice as you have it now.

Nick Bristol

Registered on February 1, 2004, 752 Posts, 14140 Comments

Comment posted by Michael Lowe on June 21, 2010 at 8:17 PM

Sweet image, Lon. I love the raw power in this scene.

Ed

Registered on February 11, 2004, 777 Posts, 5252 Comments

Comment posted by Bruno Silva on June 21, 2010 at 9:28 PM

I love everything about this. works nicelly for me. yes, I would clone the small piece of rock on the right edge. man, beautiful in all words...! great work, Lon!

Registered on May 6, 2009, 132 Posts, 1406 Comments

Comment posted by Tony Kuyper on June 21, 2010 at 10:27 PM

I really like the hint of color this technique brings back to the image, though these particular colors seem a bit cool. Still the light is what it was, and this has a strong sense of reality to it.

How does this little tree keep going. Looks like a tough life.

Registered on November 1, 2003, 364 Posts, 22328 Comments

Comment posted by Kevin Trinkner on June 21, 2010 at 10:37 PM

Love it Lon, this is a little different form the normal I've seen from you. Love the processing and your choice of blending in some color instead of going all the way mono.
Great scene and well presented.

Registered on June 30, 2008, 203 Posts, 2641 Comments

Comment posted by Michael R Reynolds on June 22, 2010 at 12:13 AM

Lon,
I like the bleed back technique with this image. Its very effective in bringing out the detail in the rushing water. Really nice. Third time is the charm. Best Regards.

Registered on February 26, 2008, 54 Posts, 812 Comments

Comment posted by Ricardo La Piettra on June 22, 2010 at 9:46 AM

Wow, outstanding in every aspect. Congrats Lon.

Registered on July 22, 2009, 62 Posts, 730 Comments

Comment posted by Floris van Breugel on June 22, 2010 at 10:02 AM

Yea.. you're never gonna beat the first one

The muted color works fine for me, and the blur is not an issue.

Registered on December 19, 2008, 306 Posts, 4840 Comments

Comment posted by Laurent Baig on June 22, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Love the detail in the water here, Lon. This is very nice

Registered on January 12, 2005, 206 Posts, 6784 Comments

Comment posted by Dietrich Gloger on June 22, 2010 at 3:15 PM

I remember I liked the first version a lot. Number II was - well Number II

(actually I do not remember anymore, not because it was not a memorable shot. I just cannot compare in front of my minds eye at the moment.)
But this is not just Number III for me. The water works great, particular what goes on in the fg. I also like that one rock in the upper right. The color looks very good! Everythin I just mentioned is what I noticed first. The blurred branches are not an issue for me.

Having said all that, Number I remains number 1

There is something magic, etherial about those fav. images. They cannot really repeated I think - that makes them what they are.

Registered on January 26, 2007, 360 Posts, 9876 Comments

Comment posted by Chris Chamberlain on June 22, 2010 at 11:10 PM

It's a hard call. The first one is in different light, and therefore has a totally different look/feel. I like this one a lot too. Water movement is perfect! I like the rich tones beneath the surface too,nice job with the blend). Pretty nice, and I don't mind the rock/rocks.

Chris

Registered on March 13, 2007, 500 Posts, 8365 Comments

Comment posted by Eric Good on June 23, 2010 at 12:24 AM

I don't remember the others, but I'm liking this one. I particularly like the placement of that lone stone and the base of the tree... great diagonal tension. Good stuff!

Registered on March 17, 2007, 116 Posts, 4764 Comments

Comment posted by Paul Breitkreuz on June 23, 2010 at 3:20 PM

WOW, I almost missed this one, Lon, Although I do not convert to B&W I do like your idea of the slight color bleed process you had mentioned, at least in this resulting image. I also agree about the first take on certain scenes too. Kind of amazing how we go back to a site and things just do not seem to fit entirely from what we recall or the conditions are just not the same for a variety of reasons. In some cases it can be dramatic as a result of mother nature wielding a strong hand of rearrangement with wind, fire, water, ice, or whatever, but that's just how it goes out there in nature.
I can recall a comment on an image I posted a few years ago where the person stated a specific item in the image, a large bush, just did not seem to fit the scene.
A prominent shooter then came along and made what I thought was a profound statement. He said " get use to it folks, that's what nature looks like out there".

Registered on February 25, 2006, 525 Posts, 8448 Comments

Comment posted by Laura Stafford on June 26, 2010 at 11:58 AM

Awesome image. I like how you composed the scene. I don't find the blurred branches distracting, I think they add to the mood of the scene. When looking at the scene, I do find my eye wondering to the rock, so for me, the rock is a little distracting, but with or without the rock in the scene, it is an amazing photograph.

Laura Stafford

Registered on November 3, 2009, 52 Posts, 375 Comments