Which one?

Morrisseeee

Which one do you have a preference for folks, ie. natural (fast shutter speed) or the more arty one (slow shutter speed) ?

ED E

Sky is too much in #2. Would love to see a composite of the top of 1 and bottom of 2.

Happy4all

2nd one too fake

Adrian.Sadlier

As displayed, halo around rocks in both, more pronounced in the second. Personally, I'm not mad about MWS (milky water shots) unless they are extreme, minimalist, and soft tones.

I think a slow but not too slow shutter speed would work better with this scene - something between 1/10! to 1/3". It would show motion and some detail.

And an ND Grad ob the sky might help a little as well (on the camera rather than in PP).

Morrisseeee

Cheers folks, thanks for your opinions. I haven't tried composites much, it's on the to-do list though Personally I like the natural light in the first. The second has nice lighting on the rocks and the overall look & feel is probably not to everyone's taste, note: I'm experimenting with a Cokin Nuances big-stopper!

epiphony17

I agree with everyone above. I think the sky in the second is a little too saturated? But personally I kind of like the 'artsy' slow shutter look on water.

awec

Would the second one look better in black and white to kill that sky a bit?

Alanstrainor

I like the first image best. The choppy water adds a nice texture to the image, and it's a lovely composition. The sky looks a bit over blown, perhaps the highlights were pulled down too much to reveal the clouds? There's a lot of dynamic range here so perhaps it was unavoidable.

Mike Litoris

I prefer 1. It's quite a nice shot. The slow shutter effect is overdone in the 2nd imo. I'd also crop a little from the bottom of the frame.


As mentioned by Adrian an ND grad helps greatly. It's a must for landscape stuff.


Also agree with awec that the 2nd could work well in B+W, maybe a dark and contrasty B+W. The light on the rocks in the foreground will give them a nice texture.

awec

You could also maybe use the brush to paint a slightly increased exposure onto the foreground rocks of the first one to get a bit more detail? Not sure if it would look better but worth a go?

Morrisseeee

Cheers folks, when I get a chance I'll try a few edits I actually used an ND grad in one shot but it didn't turn out too well, operator error maybe :eek: