Cropped slightly per your previous post for visual reference:
A bit awkward to me, crowding the top of the falls. I will have to look at my print tonight to see where I cropped it exactly, but I gave it a bit of sky to breath. I like the idea of the sky being the "entry point" of the waterfall. Another thought would be to try burning in the sky to get it darker, but it doesn't look as natural?
Just some of my thoughts.
For your consideration: an interpretation more along the lines of the Hudson River Valley School of painting. Less literal, more... theatrical.
Ha, how about a 5x7 horizontal crop right across the bottom of the frame, lopping off another, say, 10% off the top? Burn-in the trees on the right side of the frame, bring up the contrast of the water and it starts to be bit more of an abstract. (Of course, as my mama used to say,“Striving to better, oft we mar what's well.”)
That is the issue with post filming cropping...Taking the space above the falls into full consideration by the time of the exposure might have presented itself with a different solution that is not possible just cropping with the present negative. A slight shift in position, a different placement of the fall (instead of centered), or who knows what change, might have presented an image that still took the advantage of the wonderful light.Originally Posted by Corran
Darkening the sky seems to me to be unsatisafactory -- it is the source of the waterfall's light, though would pop out the top of the falls some.
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
Since this is becoming a lengthier discussion, I prefer the versions with some sky showing, and not too burned in either. As Vaughn posted, that is where the illumination comes from, so for me it appropriate to include it. I may not be saying this well, but in scenes that are in some sense “larger,” the inclusion of the sky is logical, while in close-up details, such as a tidal pool (Weston) or just water over rocks, the absence of sky makes sense.
I prefer the first version Bryan posted. As long as the sky is a bit darker than the water, then I don't have a problem with it.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
This has been a really interesting discussion and I appreciate all the thoughtful replies!
If you'll permit me one more aside - as I mentioned, I did make a silver gelatin print of this image a few weeks ago. I took a quick photo of the image for reference, as I may have cropped ever so slightly different while composing on the easel. I also matted it with a bit of a white border. Whether or not it makes anyone see the image differently, I don't know. I apologize for the reflections from the baggie:
Sure would be nice to say "Hold that light right there!" and have time to work. I got spoiled working on light overcast days in the redwoods...like working under a big slow-moving softbox.
Perhaps just keeping the top of the tree in that is directly above the right half of the waterfall would be sufficient. But this is all fine-tuning an already wonderful image -- I love the shadow of the falling water and how it shows the shape of the cliff face. Also the pooling of the light at the bottom of the falls. Shadows across falling water can be difficult to work with, and Bryan has handled that well. Ken's version brought out those shadows a bit more.
Edited to add: the silver example -- I like the cropping -- and the little bit more of the bottom of the negative, also. I prefer the tonality of the first image...but that might just be the reproduction. The only thing I might change is to give ever so slightly some space between the tree top and the edge of the image...just to create a little tension and excitement for those whose eyes travel up the pillars of light into the sky. A little space (1/32"?) might help keep their eyes from continuing off the image and instead fall back down the falls.
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
I almost mentioned you (but had forgotten your name, sorry) in another post somewhere as an example of someone working with the chaos of the woods/forest and capable of bringing some order out of it in the form of an image. You do it very well.
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks