CI Photocommunity

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Salmon Creek

laurence2

Well-Known Member
This was a scan from the Pentax 645 transparency. I am showing this, as I will be going back with the SD-14, so that I can use the software to process the X3F Raw file.

I wanted to bring out the shadows more on this jpeg scanned image, and found that my copy of Photoshop Elements has a "Fill Flash" feature that works quite nicely.

The original was basically near total black in the shadows, but the Fill Flash lightened those areas and brought out the ferns in the background shadows. I had to go very easy on the Fill Flash, as too much of it results in poor contrast.

The foreground is not rendered in black and white. The rocks are "new" deposits and thus are all gray in tone.

Scanned at 2400 dpi and 200 lpi with the Epson V700, resulting in a large file (about 85 megabytes). Downsized in "Save for Web".

Can't wait to get back there with the Sigma!

Pentax 645
Vega 12b lens
1 second @ f:11
Velvia
 

Attachments

  • WaterSupplyCreek.jpg
    WaterSupplyCreek.jpg
    158.1 KB · Views: 18

Guest .

Banned
Hi Laurence,

Water like velvet! An outstanding shot! :z02_respekt::z02_respekt:

See you with such nice landscapes

Klaus

P.S. How long did you expose?
 

laurence2

Well-Known Member
Hi Laurence,

Water like velvet! An outstanding shot! :z02_respekt::z02_respekt:

See you with such nice landscapes

Klaus

P.S. How long did you expose?

Hello Klaus, thank you for the compliment. I exposed this for 1 second at f:11, using a polarizer to cut down the glare and allow for a longer shutter speed. I have found that anything longer than 1/2 second produces nice "foam" on the water areas. Most of the creeks seem to have a similar volume and speed of flow in this area, so I am usually pretty well set with shutter speeds of 1/2 second, 1 second, or even 2 seconds. Anything more than 2 seconds produces an image that is "too foamy".

The old Vega lens never fails to produce good colors.

This particular area holds a good memory for me. When I was 12-14 years old, I often would pack my sleeping bag and a small stove to the banks of the little creek you see, right up there in the green groundcover area. It was always nice to listen to the small creek gurgling along, and the more powerful rapids of the main river in the background.

It is a joy to see the salmon leaping up the little staircase to spawn in the small creek. It's always surprising that a 20 pound salmon or steelhead can even make headway in such a small creek, but they seem to be right at home.

In fact, I hope to get some images of the salmon or steelhead as they are leaping the little waterfalls with the SD-14, and to process in SPP.

This is where I sort of "cut my teeth" on learning the behaviors of elk, bears, and deer. It is a sustaining memory that keeps me in place.
 

redrobin

Member
Laurence, Beautiful picture I usually associate water motion like that with more then a 1 second exposure.
The monotone color of the rocks in the foreground really accentuate the foliage color.
Rich
 

laurence2

Well-Known Member
sendhill, jr, and redrobin, THANKS for checking in!

sendhill, I agree that up into the 2-second range can be best all around. In this case though, the water was really moving fast, and 1 second gave me what I wanted.

Thanks all!
 
Top