Today, after a bit of a detour to post film photos on my other blog, here, I'm back with the promised waterfall photos. As ought to be clear, the photographer has to walk in the creek to get to the waterfall. It wasn't deep, mostly an inch or two. But as soon as I saw the canyon, I didn't care. I was happy to find a rock big enough to park my camera bag and explore.
I didn't get right up into the waterfall. Get that close and there's nothing but falling water. Unless you've got a model willing to get wet in an IBTWYPDB. (Michelle just laughed.)
Generally when approaching something like this, I like to take photos on the way in, of the thing itself, and sometimes on the way out as well. Sometimes the thing itself turns out not the star of the show. This also gives the photographer a chance to use a different lens on the way out which might save changing lenses in complicated situations.
In this case I ended up using the 24-104, mostly at the wide end, and the 14mm Sigma lens. There was great texture on the walls, and I could see where in slightly different light just working the walls would end up with some great photos.
Yes, I'd go back again, with or without a model. It strikes me that sunset at the right time of year would be amazing with the light shining almost horizontally into the canyon. (Yes I just drifted off in a photo ramble reverie.)
Digression 2. Selection. There's a lot of really similar photos here. I was trying slightly different focal lengths and exposure settings. Plus, knowing these would show up on the blog, where someone might like one of them well enough to buy, I wanted to try to capture a sense of what it was like in the damp, dim, mossy canyon. Plus, just because it looks good on the back of the camera, doesn't mean it will look good on the big screen. Sometimes walls like this fall out of focus in a really unattractive way. Better to take more photos and have a choice, but without descending into spray and pray.
If I had to pick one to print, I'd have a tough time. Generally you're only supposed to show your very best work. The problem is that if your standards are sufficiently high you end up showing nothing at all.
So I'm really happy with all these. Several of them got a fairly rare 4 stars, and one got a 5 star rating. Which of these do you think deserves that 5 star rating? Is one of these image of the month?
Digression 3, for photographers. This is a fairly dim canyon on a cloudy day. Both lenses were used wide open, f4 and f1.8 respectively, a fairly slow 1/60 shutter, and ISO 800 or 1600. Plus trying to stand still, in water running over slippery rocks.
Digression 4. The liking enough to buy. One of my readers has had an image as a desktop screen for several years, and finally decided it was time to print it big (15 x 19). I've got it here at home now awaiting delivery, and I'm loving looking at it because it looks different in print. Thank you ever so much!
1. The first views of the waterfall.
2. No, the creek isn't just wade in on nice gravel. There's a bit of careful climbing to be done.
4. If blogger hasn't screwed me up, this is a vertical panorama, 6216 x 9470 px. Or printed out in exquisite detail, 21 x 31 inches.
8. One of the rules in photography is to turn around a look behind you. This is the view looking out, with my camera back perched on a rock to help give scale.
I sometimes get fascinated by the texture of rock. This is a huge chunk of black slate. I was trying to find the right exposure on a bright day, to capture the black of the rock, but without losing texture, on Acros II film.
Linda's mom with her trademarked suspicious look asking, "Keith, is there film in that camera?!" During a visit to some of her family near Guelph.