Tired of angel hair waterfalls
Jul 1, 2017 07:26:32 #
I fully agree. Photographers seemed to think it was cool...I for one thought it looked fake.
I want my landscape photography to look realistic as one would see it.
I want my landscape photography to look realistic as one would see it.
Jul 1, 2017 08:02:06 #
Haydon wrote:
It's all a matter of personal choices here and artistry is subjective. It's no different than a Nikon/Canon battle or a SOOC/PP feud. Respect the work of others and drive your own work to find your style.
Jul 1, 2017 08:03:31 #
Jul 1, 2017 08:09:43 #
Jul 1, 2017 08:30:59 #
Acufine3200
Loc: Texarkana USA
Haydon--fantastic concept and imagery. To me a great b&w shot transcends any thought of "I wonder what this looked like in color.' Your shot is an excellent example.
Jul 1, 2017 09:02:08 #
Thanks for posting those photos. I'm still fairly new at this DSLR thing, and I'm very much a hands-on/visual learner; so these are a great help to me!
Jul 1, 2017 09:02:11 #
RickL wrote:
I totally agree. I had to judge an international photo. Contest. 99% of the water looked like tacky. Pretty sad trend. They didn't get my vote!
Rick, I'm glad to hear about that 99% ! Why we see so much of what could be interesting water shots, but look more like heavy cream or plaster, even here on the UHH, is beyond my understanding. I hardly give them enough time to rate the photo; if, when I open the topic and see what should be moving water but looks solid, I'm gone to the next post. I'm not in the hobby for photo sales, but doubt that the majority of people really want a photo of water that resembles plastic.Jul 1, 2017 09:11:53 #
I like your profile name. I use to use a lot of Acufine back in the 60's. Film could really be pushed by it. Now I turn a dial and I can have even better results and higher ISO(ASA) than ever before.
Jul 1, 2017 09:13:20 #
Jul 1, 2017 09:17:57 #
RickL wrote:
It seems to be the thing to remove all of the detail from waterfalls. I prefer to see water detail and some action. How about water drops caught in mid air?
Your choice. I prefer to do both. Some scenes can be 10X better with wispy while others not so good. Keep your options open especially if you plan to sell any.
Jul 1, 2017 09:25:40 #
mborn wrote:
I agree I always do both types and pick out the best one for me
Your second one shows the real power and dimension of the waterfall. Excellent, obviously I personally, don't care for the first.
My personal goal in shooting waterfalls is to show the grandeur and magnificence of the water.
Jul 1, 2017 09:27:07 #
RickL wrote:
It seems to be the thing to remove all of the detail from waterfalls. I prefer to see water detail and some action. How about water drops caught in mid air?
I'm with you! I like water to look like water. I've seen the same effect added to fountains in pools and ponds. Very short exposure to get waterdrops hanging in the air. Beautiful (even if many disagree with me).
Jul 1, 2017 09:27:51 #
I think the terminology has been reversed here. Short exposures are used to 'freeze' or stop action. When water is captured at 1/100 or 1/200 sec or less it is 'frozen'. Extending the exposure time actually captures more movement of the water and if done properly, conveys that movement to the viewer. Your eye/brain is not capable of capturing and processing a 1/100 sec slice of water over a waterfall.
Think of one of those fountains that shoot a little burst of water into the air. You could freeze the burst in mid air and show a perfectly stopped spit of water suspended in the air with no information on its direction or sense of movement. A slower shutter speed or stack could show the full trajectory and movement of the spurt.
Blur is a well established method of conveying movement.
Think of one of those fountains that shoot a little burst of water into the air. You could freeze the burst in mid air and show a perfectly stopped spit of water suspended in the air with no information on its direction or sense of movement. A slower shutter speed or stack could show the full trajectory and movement of the spurt.
Blur is a well established method of conveying movement.
Jul 1, 2017 09:28:38 #
Jul 1, 2017 09:31:05 #
I recall some time back losing out on first place in an art show because of how I photographed the water. I "stopped" it. The judge wanted it to look like milk. When I talked to him, he asked me why I shot it as I did. I replied that I was shooting water, not milk. He didn't like my answer! Oh well. I will be true to myself.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.