Tumalo Falls in the Deschutes National Forest in central Oregon. This is a 30 metre drop for Tumalo Creek, a tributary of the Deschutes River.
This was taken with a ND1000 filter (a ten-stop filter, although mine actually works out to closer to 12.5 stops). I have an ND8 filter but in the bright sunlight it wasn't able to bring the shutter speed down as far as I wanted.
This shot seems technically sound and is reasonably traditionally composed, but doesn't really excite me. What do you think?
I'm a British software developer and photographer living in Vancouver, BC. I mainly photograph landscapes, cityscapes, night scenes, and water.
If you're interested in any...
The water looks fantastic in this photo! The whole scene is pretty darn nice, actually, great composition and well done on the exposure. If there was more sharpness and contrast in the bank on the right (more rocks or more trees instead of low brush), I think it might help a bit. The grey brush softens that area just enough to unbalance the softness-to-sharpness ratio, it takes a bit away from the soft water effect, imho. But I'm not complaining -- it's still a marvelous shot. I'd be thrilled to take one photo that was a fraction as technically and aesthetically pleasing as this! :)
I am amazed at this shot, I am also amazed at some of the the comments and your critique of it. I do want to learn and need to learn so much about photography Alexis, Reva and Shane. At some point when you and if you would I would love if you could help me a bit. I am very much a beginner, and need to learn much, but I do enjoy taking photos. Everyone on 365 has been so very helpful this is a great site.
dar
Its a really nice scene Alexis and you've captured it perfectly. I'm a big fan of long exposures but If I'm honest, and I hope thats ok, this makes me want to see a close shot of just the waterfall. Not sure if you can get closer to it but I'd really like to see if fill the frame.
I really appreciate all the info you give on this site Alexis so would you mind very much me asking if you were buying a first DLSR camera would you pick the Cannon EOS 600D or the Nikon 3200 ? Hope you don't mind me picking your brains, just ignore the question if you want!
There's no easy answer to this because there are so many factors to consider. The important thing to remember is that whichever you buy, you are buying into a system. Once you buy either the Canon or Nikon, you will inevitably end up buying another lens, and then maybe a flash. By that time, you're stuck -- you can upgrade to a newer Canon or Nikon, but you can't switch from Canon to Nikon (or vice versa) without having to start building your lens collection again from scratch.
There are many people who will extoll the virtues of Canon or Nikon and disparage the other, I'm not personally of that view. Pretty much all DSLR cameras today are extremely capable, and in my opinion, when buying a new camera, the most important factors are not the technical specifications of a given Nikon or Canon, but the expandability of the system, and how the camera 'feels' to the user.
At the time I bought, I steered towards Canon as they had more consumer-grade (i.e., affordable) image-stabilised lenses available than Nikon at the time. However, Nikon have significantly increased their VR range of lenses so that's no longer a distinguishing factor. Indeed, when comparing the expandability of Canon vs. Nikon systems, they are almost identical, with a wide range of lenses, flashes etc. available at most budgets. This isn't necessarily the case with some of the less-established manufacturers.
So for me, the most important thing when deciding between those two models would be for you to go to a shop and try them out! They will feel differently in your hands, and it's quite likely that simply by holding each model and trying it out for a few minutes, you'll decide which you like using best, and which is most intuitive for you. That's a decision only you can make, and can't be determined from reviews or other people's opinions.
From a technical standpoint, I believe that the Canon 600D is slightly outclassed by the Nikon D3200 -- the Canon 650D would be a better comparison. If the only choice is between the 600D and the D3200, then the D3200, technically, is better. However, if the 600D feels better to hold and use then I would absolutely consider that as being far more important than the slight technical differences between the models.
As a final note on image quality, I would point out that the camera I'm using, the 50D, has exactly the same sensor as the Canon 500D, a camera which is now three generations out of date. Yes, it has other features that the 500D doesn't have, but in terms of single-image quality, the results between the two cameras when used identically should be indistinguishable. This hopefully shows that (assuming you like my photos!) you certainly don't need the newest or greatest DSLR to get great image quality.
I hope that helps, let me know if you have any questions!
Oh I like the composition and slow shutter/ nd filter combo. That's a hard shot to get in the afternoon with the sun up high @30s. I've been experimenting with these cheap nd fader filters from amazon and they seem ok. I like having less to haul around on hikes.
@abirkill Thank you so much for all that information Alexsis, I knew you would be the one to ask as you give your advice so freely.
My original choice was the Cannon EOS 600D & I have been & held it in my hands with a very helpful guy from the shop answering all my questions I asked. Recently one of my followers has purchased the Nikon D3200 & I have been so impressed with the picture quality that I am dithering. I understand completely all you say & don't need the latest model just a good camera for my money. More pixels with the Nikon but I know that is not everything & I am used to the language of the Cannon. There is a good privately owned Camera shop in Lancaster which has been recommended so I think I will go & do as you say & hold each one in my hand plus the Cannon 650D & then make my mind up. I have used my little P&S but I want to develop my camera skills. I have learnt so much since starting this project & want to do more exciting stuff. Many thanks again for your excellent advice & taking the time to answer my query....you are a star!
Really cool image, Alexis. I like the way the moving water looks like cotton sitting on the surface. But the burning question is - did you go to the Deschutes Brewery in Bend? It's on my list of places to see before I die lol. Black Butte Porter. Mmmmm...
i think this is really fabulous... that long exposure on the water is wonderful and i like the way it's composed a lot...
a couple things i would probably play with on this shot...
1. i think the fluffy silkiness of the water gives it a fantastical quality but this isn't really replicated in the surrounding foliage... i'd be so tempted to play with the greens and the colours of the slate to make them pop a bit more and give the whole thing a more fantasy-like quality... i don't imagine that is what you are after, tho...
2. the other thing i might try is a tighter crop... either shave some off the right hand side to get a more symmetrical framing of the falls at the top (not that i am in favour of symmetry, but i think it might draw the eye nicely)... the other is to crop some off the bottom and bring out the detail of the water closer to the fall...
but that would just be me playing... and you've already got an amazing photo here!
dar
There's no easy answer to this because there are so many factors to consider. The important thing to remember is that whichever you buy, you are buying into a system. Once you buy either the Canon or Nikon, you will inevitably end up buying another lens, and then maybe a flash. By that time, you're stuck -- you can upgrade to a newer Canon or Nikon, but you can't switch from Canon to Nikon (or vice versa) without having to start building your lens collection again from scratch.
There are many people who will extoll the virtues of Canon or Nikon and disparage the other, I'm not personally of that view. Pretty much all DSLR cameras today are extremely capable, and in my opinion, when buying a new camera, the most important factors are not the technical specifications of a given Nikon or Canon, but the expandability of the system, and how the camera 'feels' to the user.
At the time I bought, I steered towards Canon as they had more consumer-grade (i.e., affordable) image-stabilised lenses available than Nikon at the time. However, Nikon have significantly increased their VR range of lenses so that's no longer a distinguishing factor. Indeed, when comparing the expandability of Canon vs. Nikon systems, they are almost identical, with a wide range of lenses, flashes etc. available at most budgets. This isn't necessarily the case with some of the less-established manufacturers.
So for me, the most important thing when deciding between those two models would be for you to go to a shop and try them out! They will feel differently in your hands, and it's quite likely that simply by holding each model and trying it out for a few minutes, you'll decide which you like using best, and which is most intuitive for you. That's a decision only you can make, and can't be determined from reviews or other people's opinions.
From a technical standpoint, I believe that the Canon 600D is slightly outclassed by the Nikon D3200 -- the Canon 650D would be a better comparison. If the only choice is between the 600D and the D3200, then the D3200, technically, is better. However, if the 600D feels better to hold and use then I would absolutely consider that as being far more important than the slight technical differences between the models.
As a final note on image quality, I would point out that the camera I'm using, the 50D, has exactly the same sensor as the Canon 500D, a camera which is now three generations out of date. Yes, it has other features that the 500D doesn't have, but in terms of single-image quality, the results between the two cameras when used identically should be indistinguishable. This hopefully shows that (assuming you like my photos!) you certainly don't need the newest or greatest DSLR to get great image quality.
I hope that helps, let me know if you have any questions!
My original choice was the Cannon EOS 600D & I have been & held it in my hands with a very helpful guy from the shop answering all my questions I asked. Recently one of my followers has purchased the Nikon D3200 & I have been so impressed with the picture quality that I am dithering. I understand completely all you say & don't need the latest model just a good camera for my money. More pixels with the Nikon but I know that is not everything & I am used to the language of the Cannon. There is a good privately owned Camera shop in Lancaster which has been recommended so I think I will go & do as you say & hold each one in my hand plus the Cannon 650D & then make my mind up. I have used my little P&S but I want to develop my camera skills. I have learnt so much since starting this project & want to do more exciting stuff. Many thanks again for your excellent advice & taking the time to answer my query....you are a star!
a couple things i would probably play with on this shot...
1. i think the fluffy silkiness of the water gives it a fantastical quality but this isn't really replicated in the surrounding foliage... i'd be so tempted to play with the greens and the colours of the slate to make them pop a bit more and give the whole thing a more fantasy-like quality... i don't imagine that is what you are after, tho...
2. the other thing i might try is a tighter crop... either shave some off the right hand side to get a more symmetrical framing of the falls at the top (not that i am in favour of symmetry, but i think it might draw the eye nicely)... the other is to crop some off the bottom and bring out the detail of the water closer to the fall...
but that would just be me playing... and you've already got an amazing photo here!