Do all good waterfalls share a common natural trait?

[Heroique]

When you come across a waterfall, how do you decide if it’s worth your time as a large format photographer?

That is, which of its natural traits help you decide whether or not to set-up your gear, and begin the process of composition?

For example, does the height or angle of its fall take priority for you? Or is it the speed or volume of the current? Does the viewpoint matter most? Maybe it’s the type of light (I often find this problematic), the transparency or reflective quality of the water, what the water is hitting, the force of the strike, or the entire fall’s relationship w/ the surrounding landscape or sky?

And here’s what I’m most curious about – if you’ve created many images of many waterfalls, have you discovered the best ones usually share a common natural element, or call for the same LF tools, time and again?

[Gem Singer]

I'm a B&W photographer, so it's the type of lighting and the way the light it strikes the water.

I look for the most dramatic angle I can locate to set up my camera.

If the sky is in the picture, I use a filter to darken the sky and bring out the clouds.

[Kirk Gittings]

I rarely do waterfalls. But the couple I have was because there was some sense of otherness. I don't know exactly how to explain that except it has nothing to do with beauty, but more to do with a sense like you have stepped back into an otherworldly mythic time.

[Vaughn]

About 98% of it is about the light - the waterfall just happens to be what the light is reflecting off of. The other 2% is about the waterfall itself. That said, I am attracted to falling water, so my attention is going in that direction, which makes me look at the light reflecting off of the fall and the surrounding landscape.

Shutter speed is also a factor in how the waterfall and the light will appear in the image. Stop-motion, slightly blurred (with just the hint of movement) and totally soft render the light and the waterfall very differently.

Four different approaches to waterfalls I have done:

1) 8x10 -- From behind the falls -- Platinum print, but may do a carbon (and will pull more 'detail' in the water)
2) 5x7 -- carbon print. The falling light is as important as the falling water
3) 8x10 -- Classic view, platinum, the forms created by the light reflecting off the landscape around and below the falls are important (to me)
4) 11x14 -- The shape of the light and dark areas and how they work together are far more important than the falls themselves.

[h2oman]

Vaughn,

I was just thinking about #2 the other day - a very memorable image for me. Thanks for posting it again.

[sanking]

I used to do a lot of work with waterfalls, so many of them in my part of the world. One of the main reasons I photographed them was for the experience itself of getting out in nature for several hours, in many cases the photography was secondary.

One of the problems I personally have with waterfalls is that I am not after a totally realistic look and this can be a difficult subject to abstract since many consider it too pictorial, or pretty, especially in color. I have a friend or two who would never just photograph a waterfall because they consider it such a prosaic subject.

About the only commonality I have found in my own approach to photographing waterfalls is that long exposures usually work best as the creamy look of water usually has a nicer look than frozen water. Though of course some times freezing the water also works. Also, you really want to avoid the common views of well known waterfalls so it helps to look for unusual viewpoints. Attached is a view of a fairly well known, and quite large, waterfall in North Carolina, Whitewater Falls, but not many people would recognize the view. It is one of my favorite image of some several hundred negatives I have made of the subject. http://www.sandykingphotography.com/photography-portfolio/carolina-rock-water/Photographs/1059-whitewater-falls-nc-2

Sandy

[John Olsen]

Most of my waterfalls were in such intimate, back-country places that I have had to use a 20mm lens on my trusty Nikon. However, the waterfall attached here struck me as a primal force, something worthy of LF effort. I camped here for a couple of days and hope to return sometime when the afternoon sun actually comes into the canyon. (Palouse Falls, Eastern Washington, February 2013)
100076

[Heroique]

Palouse Falls, Eastern Washington, February 2013.

Palouse Falls is a strange, raging scene to find in such arid, quiet land.

When I travel from Seattle to N. Idaho, I pass by and always stop for the thrill, but you’ve captured a greater flow than I ever remember. And much more spray, a favorite part for me of any waterfall. I like how the circular rim offers a convenient way to access elevated viewpoints facing the falls. Not too common.

I understand your remark about the light; it’s difficult here.

[E. von Hoegh]

When you come across a waterfall, how do you decide if it’s worth your time as a large format photographer?

That is, which of its natural traits help you decide whether or not to set-up your gear, and begin the process of composition?

For example, does the height or angle of its fall take priority for you? Or is it the speed or volume of the current? Does the viewpoint matter most? Maybe it’s the type of light (I often find this problematic), the transparency or reflective quality of the water, what the water is hitting, the force of the strike, or the entire fall’s relationship w/ the surrounding landscape or sky?

And here’s what I’m most curious about – if you’ve created many images of many waterfalls, have you discovered the best ones usually share a common natural element, or call for the same LF tools, time and again?

"Do all good waterfalls share a common natural trait? "

Yes. They consist of water, falling.

[Bruce Watson]

That is, which of its natural traits help you decide whether or not to set-up your gear, and begin the process of composition?

I work oppositely of that -- I do the composition first, and only set up my gear if I have composition that interests me.

Typically what I look for is personality. All waterfalls have their own personalities, and I look for one that engages me on some level. Some do, some don't. I really can't explain it better than that. Then, I look for a composition that shows that personality and is aesthetically pleasing to me. If I can find that, then it's a light issue. If the light is right at the time, I'll set up on it right away. But typically I can see that the light would be better at some other time, or even some other season. Many times, the light just isn't ever going to be good on that particular scene.

So... if I get a waterfall personality I like, and can find a composition I like, and the light is right, I'll set up on it and evaluate it. If I like what I see through the ground glass, I'll burn a sheet of film. If not, I'll tear it all down, pack it all up, and keep hiking, maybe to return at a different time of day, or a different season, and maybe not at all.

What I've found is that if I force the issue -- make a photograph of a waterfall that doesn't meet all my criteria, I don't ever print it. So there's no point in trying to force it. If everything is right, it's worth burning a sheet of film. Else, I enjoy the waterfall and it's surroundings for a bit, then hike on.

[Jim Galli]

When you come across a waterfall, how do you decide if it’s worth your time as a large format photographer?

That is, which of its natural traits help you decide whether or not to set-up your gear, and begin the process of composition?

For example, does the height or angle of its fall take priority for you? Or is it the speed or volume of the current? Does the viewpoint matter most? Maybe it’s the type of light (I often find this problematic), the transparency or reflective quality of the water, what the water is hitting, the force of the strike, or the entire fall’s relationship w/ the surrounding landscape or sky?

And here’s what I’m most curious about – if you’ve created many images of many waterfalls, have you discovered the best ones usually share a common natural element, or call for the same LF tools, time and again?

Do you just like to hear yourself talk?

[ImSoNegative]

for me its about the angle of view, I like to use longer lenses now when shooting falls, on 4x5 210mm and above

[Ken Lee]

have you discovered the best ones usually share a common natural element?

Definitely!

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/Pond.jpg

[Vaughn]

Do you just like to hear yourself talk?

I believe she appreciates what other people think about when they are creating. For s/he no fool who gives what s/he cannot keep..to gain that which s/he cannot lose. In this case, knowledge and understanding.
:)

Ken -- every photograph has the photographer in it!

[Heroique]

Typically what I look for is personality. All waterfalls have their own personalities, and I look for one that engages me on some level. Some do, some don't. I really can't explain it better than that.

Interesting, I’m also engaged by “personality” in some landscapes, and when it happens, it’s difficult to explain indeed. Sometimes w/ waterfalls, but not all the time. A specific place where it happens without fail is Norris Geyser Basin (in Yellowstone NP). Each geyser, mudpot, fumarole, etc., no matter how big or small, always strikes me as a “personality.” Some invite LF attention, some spurn it. Maybe it’s a matter of projection, as the psychologists say, but it seems they all should have a personal name to match their behavior and attitude toward the LF photographer.


Do you just like to hear yourself talk?

Hmm, curious why you just want to hear yourself talk and not participate. ;^)


…the creamy look of water usually has a nicer look than frozen water. Though of course some times freezing the water also works.

How much creaminess would be a good thread topic. From a touch of cream to a healthy serving of mayonnaise. Most of my waterfalls have at least a touch of cream or more. But here’s one of the few waterfalls where I wanted only a crystalline appearance, like a vein of diamonds in the rock. This is a snow-melt waterfall in the North Cascades, flowing over granite, down into an abyss.

Tachi 4x5
Schneider XL 110mm/5.6
TMax-100 (in TMax rs)
Epson 4990/Epson Scan

[Brian Sims]

Do you just like to hear yourself talk?

Jim, are you and Heroique married?

[Robert Langham]

Water + gravity. Now asking if all moving photographs of waterfalls have a common natural trait....that might get us some where.

100122

[Eric James]

Most of my waterfalls were in such intimate, back-country places that I have had to use a 20mm lens on my trusty Nikon. However, the waterfall attached here struck me as a primal force, something worthy of LF effort. I camped here for a couple of days and hope to return sometime when the afternoon sun actually comes into the canyon. (Palouse Falls, Eastern Washington, February 2013)
100076

I photographed at Palouse Falls State Park last week - the light was nice but the fall volume was ~20% of what you show here. I think May would strike a nice balance between light and water volume, at least that's when I plan to return. There's a trail that descends talus to the lower river level offering less common compositions.

[Heroique]

I photographed at Palouse Falls State Park last week...

Eric, I hope you eventually post some of those shots! Given all the viewpoints, ever-changing light, and variable water flow, Palouse Falls would be an ideal subject for a journal-thread, much like Robert’s on Shiprock. BTW, the narrow-twisting-rolling Hwy 261, which takes you there, is incredibly fun to drive, and scenic too. It eventually crosses the Snake River just a few miles down the road from the turn-off to Palouse Falls. A mesmerizing ride. Just for fun, I checked the Lewis & Clark Journals since they traveled down the Snake here (1805), and passed the Palouse River’s mouth. But there’s no mention of the nearby falls. I presume the natives, frequently met in this region, didn’t bother to mention it to them, or we would have heard about it, or seen it on the maps they created.

[hoffner]

Do you just like to hear yourself talk?

+ 1.
Thanks Jim. It needed to be said.

[Heroique]

When I pulled the L&C journals off my shelf two posts above, I couldn’t resist paging back to June 13, 1805. This is the day Lewis discovered the Great Falls of the Missouri, maybe the most famous passage of the entire journals, as many here know.

And also the greatest description of a water fall by any American.

The physical traits of these falls, as Lewis describes them in a long entry, will make any LF photographer envy what he experienced, beginning, I think, with the moment he first senses them ahead in the distance. (I thought this moment worth sharing, along with the amusing misspellings.)


“...my ears were saluted with the agreeable sound of a fall of water and advancing a little further I saw the spray arrise above the plain like a collumn of smoke which would frequently dispear again in an instant caused I presume by the wind which blew pretty hard from the S.W. I did not however lose my direction to this point which soon began to make a roaring too tremendious to be mistaken for any cause short of the great falls of the Missouri.”

Today, of course, these “tremendious” falls are drowned by dams. :(

[John Olsen]

Eric, Good for you! Post your results (how did you keep the mist from soaking your camera?
Hiking down to the canyon floor would be great. I did it on an earlier trip without camera, but I'll really have to do some motivational work before loading the backpack and tripod for a shooting trip.
By the way, when I did my shot I dropped a camera part and watched it roll under the guard fence. It was irreplaceable so I climbed over the chainlink fence and hung myself over the 400' drop to get it. Good thing Ranger Rick wasn't there to see that!

[John Olsen]

Heroique, here's the train trestle over the Snake. Let's face it; the Palouse is just rotten with LF image possibilities.
100141

[Heroique]

Heroique, here's the train trestle over the Snake...

That’s incredible!

I remember it looks like a toy train set from a distance.

Your shot captures the wild joy-ride of Hwy 261.

[Eric James]

Eric, I hope you eventually post some of those shots! Given all the viewpoints, ever-changing light, and variable water flow, Palouse Falls would be an ideal subject for a journal-thread, much like Robert’s on Shiprock. BTW, the narrow-twisting-rolling Hwy 261, which takes you there, is incredibly fun to drive, and scenic too. It eventually crosses the Snake River just a few miles down the road from the turn-off to Palouse Falls. A mesmerizing ride. Just for fun, I checked the Lewis & Clark Journals since they traveled down the Snake here (1805), and passed the Palouse River’s mouth. But there’s no mention of the nearby falls. I presume the natives, frequently met in this region, didn’t bother to mention it to them, or we would have heard about it, or seen it on the maps they created.

I've kayaked the Snake from Lewiston-Clarkston to the Columbia and recall that the falls are about 3 miles up the Palouse and well out of view. (It was frustrating paddling past a town named Starbuck without having packed a milligram of caffeine for the trip.) On my resent trip I approached on 261 from the north; I've yet to travel across the bridge, just under it.

It's a nice little state park. During my first 30 minutes there I saw four marmots and a few wild turkeys, including one of the largest I've ever seen. I wasn't shooting 4x5 so I've nothing to post here. I did get an interesting shot about half an hour after sundown; I used 5 stops of GND and a 3-stop ND filter and captured what I believe is a satellite over the falls. I'll post it in the lounge's save haven...

John - I have nothing to show from water's edge. (I backtracked to photograph sunset from above.) I'll post a link in the lounge thread to a shot from a photographer I met in the park. I doubt that he had a mist problem with last week's volume; you on the other hand would have been drenched if you had ventured down when your photo was taken! Nice shot of the trestle!

[pdmoylan]

To answer the OP, loquaciouness aside, as a color photographer, i tend towards lower contrast scenes (because of DR limitations) with the reflected blue light from cloudless skies (overcast can work to). So we are talking low light takes, perhaps in shade or in early morning or early evening, and to find other color to compliment. So we are looking for compositions that enhance the flowing water without blowing out highlights or creating too much black to keep the highlights in check. You might check out several of the Icelandic photographers who have many to choose from. For me the ones that work best are those where the waterflow enhances the composition but does not dominate it.

You can find nice examples of color images from LF professionals (Dykinga, Clifton, Meunch, Till, O'Hara (his Havasu Falls images is iconic)).

I hope this helps.


PDM

[pdmoylan]

For me the ones that work best are those where the waterflow enhances the composition but does not dominate it. (see attached)100299

O'Hara (his Havasu Falls images is iconic) (see page 45 from his Grand Canyon National Park book).

See attached (90 Nikkor Velvia 50) This and all my waterfall image are readily eclipsed by David Hedley's inages from Brazil (see Large Format Landscapes thread here).


PDM[/QUOTE]

[Heroique]

...As a color photographer, I tend towards lower contrast scenes... For me, the ones that work best are those where the waterflow enhances the composition but does not dominate it.

That’s a nice composition. I like how the leaves speckle the granite.

Water falls, in flat light, that don’t dominate, on color film.

A lot of my images fit that framework, too.

To be sure, the more I look back in my portfolio (color and b/w), the more I realize I respond to landscapes that cradle murmuring waterfalls, rather than waterfalls that roar through and dominate their landscapes. (Plenty of both in my mountainous region – they don’t call them the “Cascades” for nothing!) Here’s one more from springtime, a murmuring melt-water fall, June. In another month, it’s a crisp forest floor of Silver Firs, Mountain Hemlocks, and Red Alders – until the deep snows return (N. Cascades, 5,000 feet, Wash. state).

Tachi 4x5
Fuji A 240mm/9
Astia 100F QuickLoad
Epson 4990/Epson Scan