Bruarfoss waterfall, Brekkuskógur, Iceland
photo by Jacob Vizek
website - https://unsplash.com/@jakevizek/
original image - https://unsplash.com/photos/Fhjxr14xa30
Now, I am going to rant at length about a pet peeve of mine, feel free to skip. When and who decided that photos of waterfalls have to be shot at long exposure?! Was there a memo? I guess it was interesting the first time - it does give the waterfalls a certain dreamlike quality - but now it’s almost impossible to find any photo of a waterfall that doesn’t look like white mush. Long exposure has just become a lazy shortcut - use it, and you’ll get a decent picture without much effort. Waterfalls frozen in time with a short exposure can look weird, but when done right, the result are spectacular, and no mush can compare. The photo above is a case in point. I had a hard time finding it. End rant, but I’ll be talking more about this again.
This went through a lot of processing. The original photo was a portrait, and when reframed for the 16:10 screen the part I focused on was much too bright by itself. I had to bring it down, and bring out the detail. The colors themselves should be plausible, as the main thing about this waterfall is that the water does look bright blue in real life.
There’ll be more Iceland. Much more, because Icaland is photography on easy mode - the place looks amazing wherever you point the camera. So that’s what photographers do, when they get there - point their cameras wherever.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Good or bad, let me have it.