Cascading Merced +new version!
by Lon Overacker
Thank you everyone for your comments on my last post. Here is another "leftover" from the November trip to Yosemite. Been sitting there waiting to post, but never did during my run of posts a couple months ago.
In early November we hadn't yet started receiving any El Nino water and the river was pretty low, as it is this time of year. I've always been attracted to these sections of the river where the bottom of the river is revealed during over areas where the elevation drops quickly. I love the patterns in the water, the texture and flow through all the rocks. I even tried to catch some of the reflected light off the surrounding mountain sides that were catching morning light.
The biggest issue I have with this image are the edges and crop choices. I did like the end-around flow so I kept the right side in.
What are your impressions, critiques and suggestions? As always, all opinions welcome!
NIkon D800E
Nikon 28-200VR @125mm
f/29 @ 1/2
Thanks!
Comments
18 commentsVery nice capture. The patterns created by the flowing water work well and add a lot of interest. I really like the placement of that small plant in the lower left-center. I think it adds much to the comp. To that end, I might try to bring it out and make it a bit more prominent. Also agree with Brad on cloning out that small rock on the URC of the frame.
This image is nice, but it does not hold my interest like most of your captures. The flow of the water is in deed a wonderful element in this image, but I feel there is a missing element. I love these kind of images when they have another complimenting element. IN this case, a composition with more rocks would create a structure to this image, or the inclusion of more soft reflected light on the flowing water would add another layer of interest.
I have not found a crop I like yet, but I do see where you could separate the darker tones in the water from the lighter tones to create a more layered effect. If this was my image, I would experiment with boosting the whites in the water, and adding contrast to the darker tones. This maybe create some added interest with out cropping to my eye. Maybe even some Orton effect could help with the toning part.
What do you think Lon?
This isn't actually a repost, it's a different exposure worked from scratch. I had exposed 3 images of this scene. This one here is actually 95%of the third image, and a small bit from the first. The original post was from the second image at 1/2s. This one here is 1/3 of a second. I did some content aware cloning along the upper edge as had been suggested. You'll notice more room at the bottom now. Well, I had cropped originally because there was a rock and some willow leaves/branches in the lower right. Too complicated for a content clone, so I brought in the 1st exposure as a new layer (which didn't have the leaves in the LRC) and painted the corner in from the first image, to eliminate the leaves and branches in this one. Whew.
I think I know what you mean by having more rocks, so I don't think this composition addresses that, but technically there are more rocks on the left. I think the ones in the upper left are a little distracting, but I liked the added flow towards the bottom and so I think that trumped the UL. Also, with more on the bottom, I now like the right to left flow. Also, and to your point about "more soft reflected light..." I didn't see your comment until after I finished working on the repost, but I think this one has picked up more of the reflected color throughout, but mostly in the flow near the bottom. What do you think?
I'm much happier with this, so thanks everyone.
Regarding boosting the whites and being dull, this is yet another example of what is posted no longer matches what was processed. And seeing Harley's recent images with the shadows much more blocked in the 720px version than the larger view, I still can't see how it could be my processing. I can't hardly ever recall folks commenting that my images lacked "punch" or looked dull. And I don't see why someone should have to boost, inflate or exaggerate their processing just so it looks good here. So anyway, I take no offense and with a grain of salt, feedback on brightness, contrast, punch, etc.
With that said, I processed this 1,000px image the same as always. I believe we're not seeing any issues with larger views, or images posted as comments. It seems to be only the "720px" version that's getting effected.
ANYWAY, thanks so much for your comments! How does this new image come across? Any preferences? comments? Thanks!
The new image is much better, and the larger version is really nice. The composition works much better for me, and there is more structure with better balance and flow. The reflected light looks great here too.
Nice job on the re-work.
After seeing your 720px images, as well as Harley's and my own, I am pretty much convinced this 'dulling' and 'shadow blocking' of the initial 720px image is being caused by the gallery software, but I have no idea why it is happening.
One thing is for certain: We sure had a fine time in Yosemite in November!
--P
Nick Bristol
Lone Rock, WI
Ed
Albert Darmo
Canada