Spillway Creek - Yosemite

[Steph_B]

Dear All,

This is yet another Yosemite pic. While there is a little bit of PS work (burning, levels, sharpening), this is prettily much the original pic.

Any idea how to improve this shot? Is it improv-able? Would you have taken this differently? Do you have any good tricks for this type of pics (meadow creeks)?

BW: It was taken on Velvia, with a 24mm F22 and a bit of fill flash. I probably used a polarizer as well... And a 1-stop split ND to tone down the BG.

Looking forward to your comments/suggestions!

[Tuna]

Compositionally, very pleasing using the foreground for detail, leading us into the panorama in the distance.

With Velvia, I might have expected some more saturation of colors, especially in the grassy, bushy and ground areas. That would be achieved by doing some levels adjusting but then the shadows in the foreground would get worse. As it is, the shadows on our side of the rocks are quite thin - little detail. Maybe exposure was the problem (if it is a problem at all...). Remember to expose for the highlights in a scene when using positive film. Another reason for loss of shadow or highlight detail would be the method of scanning. The film scanner may not have the necessary dynamic range for anything but perfectly exposed shots. But now I'm nit-picking. Overall, this is a very nice shot.

Good job.

Tuna

[bobbythebandit]

This is a nice scene but has been done so many times before.This one calls for something to make an impact, some object out of place maybe, a jumping fish, a deer passing by, something...........
Bobby

[Steph_B]

Compositionally, very pleasing using the foreground for detail, leading us into the panorama in the distance.

With Velvia, I might have expected some more saturation of colors, especially in the grassy, bushy and ground areas. That would be achieved by doing some levels adjusting but then the shadows in the foreground would get worse. As it is, the shadows on our side of the rocks are quite thin - little detail. Maybe exposure was the problem (if it is a problem at all...). Remember to expose for the highlights in a scene when using positive film. Another reason for loss of shadow or highlight detail would be the method of scanning. The film scanner may not have the necessary dynamic range for anything but perfectly exposed shots. But now I'm nit-picking. Overall, this is a very nice shot.

Good job.

Tuna

'Expose for the highlights' ... this is sooo very true. Thanks for remiding me! I do not shoot all that often and sometime I just forget the basics.... silly me.

In this shot, I used a pola. mostly to cut down on the light so that I could use a slower speed and blur the water. I absolutely wanted to retain the blueish reflection so I had to turn the pola. up to the point where it did not provide any saturation. Another problem when using a pola with a 24 mm is the strong effect on the sky. Mostly at this altitude (>9000 ft).

The shadows are indeed a bit thin. This might be due to the off-body flash that I was using. I thought that a bit of fill-in would be nice in order not to block totally the shadows.

I wished there would have been some sort of wildflowers on the bank, but it was too late in the season.

As for the film scanner, you just touched a very sore point! While my scanner is able to deliver 4000 dpi at 14 bits resolution, I have the increasing su****ion that its dynamic range is c***. Burned highlights and lots of noise in the shadow are usually bad signs. I am now contemplating (i.e. drooling over) the new Nikons and Dimage with multiresolution scanning. But before biting the bullet, I would like to run some tests! Maybe my old Canoscan can still do the job for the time being...

Thanks Tuna for having a look. Your gallery posts were very impressive and I value your opinion.

Cheers,

Stephane

[Steph_B]

This is a nice scene but has been done so many times before.This one calls for something to make an impact, some object out of place maybe, a jumping fish, a deer passing by, something...........
Bobby

That would have been cool! Imagine this: after setting the tripod and all the gear and carefully set the exposure and composition: voila: a deer just happens to be thristy and comes a few feet away!

Well... it does not always happen this way...

I agree with you that this a very classic shot.... and yet, there is something that leaves me wanting for more. And I just can't put my finger on it! Hence the reason for this posting... Was the light too harsh? Was the scene too contrasted? Is the left bank too cluttered? Is the viewpoint too low? Is the water not blurry enough? Do I show enough sky?

Thanks for having a look though!