Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Panorama - McArthur Falls

  1. #1
    Landscapes Moderator Andrew McLachlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Thornton, Ontario
    Posts
    6,039
    Threads
    480
    Thank You Posts

    Default Panorama - McArthur Falls

    Name:  Panorama - McArthur Falls.jpg
Views: 44
Size:  168.3 KB

    Here is a panoramic from my recent fall color trip. As can be seen many of the leaves are already gone. I thought this scene had enough of a sprinkling of color to work. McArthur Falls is on the Little Mississippi River in Ontario's Ottawa Valley. It isn't really much of a waterfall, as can be seen, but I thought perhaps a pan was the best way to capture it.

    The original captures for this pan consisted of 6 horizontal photos. There is another small cascade to the right of the rocks on the right, but I felt it was too insignificant to keep. As a result, I stitched this pan from 4 photos rather than 6.

    Nikon D200
    80-400mm VR lens @ 80mm (effective focal length 120mm)
    ISO 100
    f16 @ 0.4 sec (manually set)
    Polarizer
    Tripod with ball head (leveling base between tripod and ball head)

  2. #2
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Orford, Quebec
    Posts
    618
    Threads
    129
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Beautiful colors and falls. Nicely stitched together.good job!
    I wish that the comp would show more of the trees and less of the water. I feel that the picture lacks a foreground element which could be compensated by lowering the shore line in the frame.

  3. #3
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NE Mississippi
    Posts
    4,700
    Threads
    636
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I like the colors and you did a good job on the pano. I'd also like to see more of the trees and less of the water. Lack of foreground doesn't bother me in this instance.

  4. #4
    Robert Amoruso
    Guest

    Default

    I feel the same here, more trees less water would have improved the composition.

  5. #5
    Roman Kurywczak
    Guest

    Default

    Hey Andrew,
    Yep....another vote for more trees and less water.....but that may have intoduced sky.....which would help IMO. What to do? In this case a slower SS......since the falls arent that dominant.....to smooth the FG ripples in the water would have made the FG water more pleasing and harmonious to the scene. A ND filter definitely helps but I do wonder if the polariser was crnanked down as there is still a bunch of glare on the water. Just some food for thought for next time out. Excellent job on the stitch BTW.

  6. #6
    Publisher Arthur Morris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Indian Lake Estates, FL
    Posts
    32,506
    Threads
    1,433
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    While I love the side to side arrangement of elements I am in the more trees less water camp. A much longer ss might have given you some silky water.
    BIRDS AS ART Blog: great info and lessons, lots of images with our legendary BAA educational Captions; we will not sell you junk. 30+ years of long lens experience/e-mail with gear questions.

    BIRDS AS ART Online Store: we will not sell you junk. 35 years of long lens experience. Please e-mail with gear questions.

    Check out the new SONY e-Guide and videos that I did with Patrick Sparkman here. Ten percent discount for BPN members,

    E-mail me at samandmayasgrandpa@att.net.










  7. #7
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,829
    Threads
    569
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Andrew, Good offset placement of the falls and I like the big rock anchoring the left. I also like the detail in the water(I've always been prone to detail there) and agree on a bit less water and more trees. You don't have alot of water to begin with so I wouldn't take a great deal out. I too wonder about the polariser pertaining to the glare in the water...

  8. #8
    Landscapes Moderator Andrew McLachlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Thornton, Ontario
    Posts
    6,039
    Threads
    480
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks for all the comments. I agree with everyone that I will have to crop out some of the water. Roman is right that if I tried to add more trees I would have introduced some sky. As for polariser, I think I cranked it, but can't be certain. It is possible that I tested the pan out with verticals and then switched to the horizontals and had a brain cramp forgetting to crank it. I had a 3 stop and 10 stop ND with me and should have used them too. Ain't hind-sight wonderful!

    Thanks again to everyone for comments, much appreciated.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics