the motion blurred water was not intentional.. the camera was handheld on auto and the poor light produced 1/8 of a second shutter speed.. just a wee bit more blurry water than u normally see..

http://www.cavecom.com/pics/flood-1.jpg

trog

I actually prefer the more liquid look of the blurred water. Good job of holding still for the slow shutter speed, It looks like the river kicks back left as it flows to your right, a little pan right might have looked cool, but would have placed the right hand forground bush almost right in the middle, Nice shot.

I prefer the water this way, it gives the feeling of rushing water as one would expect to see during a flood.

i like the slow shutter speed adds a cool effect

yes i like the effect.. i was just owning up to it being more accidental than intentional.. i took half a dozen or so shots all framed slightly differently.. i do have one showing more of the rivers curve off the right..

http://www.cavecom.com/pics/flood-2.jpg

not a lot in it really between those two.. taken in scotland last week..

trog

Reminds me of the old glass plate look, as the glass plates where slow and in bright daylight I understand the exposure was ten to thirty seconds. So the water always looked that way.

Hand held, very good job. I like the framing of the first better as it's has a more centered look. The colors in the water add to the mood of the photo.

I agree with the payne. Great steady hand. It gives it a more artisic feel. I like it.
Greg

Agreed. Not all moving water should be rendered like flowing milk.

Here, the flow feels more powerful/realistic. I might actually prefer a shutter speed a notch higher. Very nice.