Took this image on a scouting trip, didn't have a lot of time to work the scene but think its worth another look. I like the portrait compositions representation of the area, but I think its too busy and detracts from the waterfall. The square crop on the other hand works to highlight the subject but lacks the context of the scene from the first image. I also think I could have gotten a little tighter on the foreground and worked the crack as a leading line a bit better... but either way; which composition do you think works better?
General immediate impression is that the "portrait" image is better, Peter. Yes, there is maybe a bit much going on, but it's interesting - the beautiful sunlit peak missing from the crop, the trees, the fall, the shaft of light on the fall, the subtly glistening foreground rocks.
In the crop, those same rocks look a bit boring or bland because in themselves they are not as powerful as they are in the other image, where they contrast with the crisp, contrasty top of the image.
I guess I might have wished to swing the camera up a bit, go wider, or step back to include the top of at least the left hand tree, and MAYBE show just a little less of the foreground rocks.
I'd highlight the areas around the fall in the crop with more contrast, especially those glistening rocks. My edit is getting a bit HDR-ish, but I hope conveys the idea of what I'm talking about.
Both versions are keepers in my view, Peter. Thanks for posting with an interesting question.
Thanks for the insight!
What you can not see is the cliff behind me that I am pressed up against to get this shot, LOL... I really struggled with how much foreground to put in the shot - I have a version with much more foreground, but backed off that quite a bit as it was overwhelming. Cutting out more of the foreground made it more of a distraction than the anchor or lead that I had envisioned. I do like the idea of selectively bringing up the highlights on the rocks to give it more of a "glistening" appearance.
Hi Peter,
Sharing my opinion. For my learning, such landscape frames are good with (1) its contextual story for full shot and (2) Abstract format. For former, foreground, mid ground and background elements need to be in cohesion. Image 1 tried to capture them but the composition is not appealing to me. Perhaps a little side, lower camera angle of similar gigs may help.
In image 2, the composition looks incomplete for my opinion due to trees half way in. perhaps, blurring them out a little could retain focus on fall.
of course, you better know the condition at shoot and your choice of story telling supersedes everything.
Interesting idea on the background blur... Since the background on image #2 is irrelevant makes sense to obscure/mute it. I am not 100% in love with the first image for a few reasons as mentioned in my description, and if I re-shoot it; I would be altering the lens angle and perspective to address a few concerns!
Thanks so much for the feedback!
if you are going back can you get over to the right and let the creek be a leading line into the falls. Then if you can't get wide enough you could always do this as a pano. I think that the portrait version is worth working with very nice scene