tree and waterfall

My thoughts to do better the next time..."get up earlier" ...lol...I like the composition and I also like the small tree, I think it is placed nicely in the frame. I am wondering if split ND and/or polarizer may have helped but I think the light is pretty harsh already. Wondering why you used 5.6 on this? I think I would have chosen a smaller aperture to try to get more DOF. If that wasn't possible I may have focused in a some detail and tried to use the light to my advantage.

Hey John, I really like the idea of the capture and the composition in general. I might leave slightly more room on left or fall side if possible next time. Seems slightly tight there. However, not knowing this locale it's hard for anyone to judge what you may have been up against with that area of the scene.
I'd agree about with your thought on the overall TOD and light or exposure latitude. To me this should work exceptionally well under better lighting possibly earlier morning and no wind. You might try a slower shutter speed too, maybe up to a second. With digital you can try a variety of shots with those adjustments to see what might look best in the end. Heck, this works as is, but for thoughts on your return trip you might give some different thoughts with suggested ideas here.
As for return trips on locales, I make plenty of returns on my own work for trying to improve on certain captures, it's all apart of the photographic process IMO.....

HI John

Looking at your camera settings, it seems like you didn't have a tripod handy. You have probably heard it a thousand times now, the first rule of landscape photography - always use a tripod! I can count on one hand the good shots I have that didn't involve a tripod.

So that said, when you return, I would try to compose it by giving the waterfall much more space all round, especially room for the water to flow out of the bottom of the frame. By giving the outflow more space and using a tripod this water would streak beautifully, providing wonderful leading lines back into and up the water fall and then back down and out. As it is, the jagged and broken vertical lines of the water don't really lead my eye anywhere, and there is no space at the bottom for my imagination to follow the water out.

Give it a try and let me know what you think of the results.

Good luck,

Shane

Thank you Nick, Paul, and Shane. But I appreciate all of the advice and I will try to use it. This is one of those times I can have a do-over; assuming they don't cut down the little tree that has found a foot-hold in that rock.

In the mean time, I'm posting a larger perspective of this.

Hi, John. This looks like a tough little spot to work with? If possible, I'd try lots of different points of view, with and without the tree. To me, it looks like your subject was the brave little tree, but you wanted to get the falls in there, too. All the more reason to try lots of different comps. Definitely try a slower shutter speed for the water flow.

John,

Looks like a great location with many possibilities. There are a number of comments that I agree with, but will say first off that I think you did a great job handling the dappled light, exposure, etc. As you noted, it was getting late and you did well with the light/situation you were presented with.

As someone else mentioned and from your comments, there is quite a little story and presentation going on with the tree growing out of the rock; and your comp gives it and the rock some prominence. For me though, the falls to the left seem cramped on the left. Obvious that you wanted to include the waterfall, but I think it's inclusion makes the viewer split between the falls and the tree/rock. Thanks for providing the large scene for context. I think that view would work very well in some softer, diffused and warmer light.

Lastly, while I understand many don't care for the silky water, I get that, but I think your shutter speed here is a "'tweener." In other words, not fast enough to really freeze the water, but not slow enough either for that soft effect. The bright light probably dictated a faster shutter speed, and of course softer light should allow slower shutter speeds. YMMV.

I like the image, again, handling the light well, but certainly warrants another stab at it if you get the chance.

Lon