Mr. Olmsted's Falls

as you undoubtedly already know, was a renown Landscape Architect (andhad a really cool name, too). The Town where these little falls arelocated was named after him.

I am concerned particular about the level of USM that I applied tothis image. What do you think?

Beauty ... nice indeed ... I love the efect of long exp.

I like the fact that beyond motion the static area in this com-position has its own aesthetical importance!

Walter, first things first, that is one beautiful place and I think you've caught it really well.

 

Secondly, you say that you are concerned about the amount of USM you applied, in what way? Too much, too little? The picture doesn't look overly sharpened to me.

 

For reference here is how I use USM:

If I'm working at full Resolution (3k * 2k pixels) I apply USM at between 60-100% with a radius of 3 pixels depending on what looks most pleasing to the eye.

 

For work which I've resized to around 800*600 etc I apply it with the same percentage but with a radius of 0.5-0.8.

 

I find this to give the optimal sharpening for a canon DSLR without ruining the shot.

 

Another tip I've picked up on with USM is using it to increase contrast, to do this you apply it to the full size image with a percentage of 10-25% but a radius of 55, it works like magic if you have a somewhat flat dynamic range in a shot. Trevor Hare is the person I picked that up from. He's got some amazing work on PN.

beautiful!

Wonderful. I wouldn't change a thing. Congrats on a fine image - Sean

The USM does not intrude and helps increase contrast in the wooded area and bridge. It is also a nice way of emphasising the movin water with the static background.

I appreciate everyone's feedback on this photograph. Ben, thank you for the USM advice. I was concerned that I was a little heavyhanded in that department this time. I applied the USM at 180% at a radius of 0.5 pixel, then faded the luminance at 95%. Those figures seem to be around what you ssuggest for the resized image. I will most definetly try out Trevor's contrast enhancement technique! Regards.

Hi Walter, very nice shot. For USM, I did exact the same as Ben, except the magic. But he is damn right on it! Try it now.

This one is a pleasure to view--soothing and peaceful. I like how dark the background is because it places the emphasis on the foreground. Blue shadows never looked so good.

Walter, my pleasure on the USM info, I learned it here so I'm happy to share it back out again. If you want to thank me in another way It'd be great if you could critique a couple of my shots ;)

Walter another beautiful landscape photo you have delivered here. As far as the sharpness it looks great to me, have you had it printed yet? For some reason on my darker photos they don't print out like they look on the screen?

Hi Darien; no I have not had this one printed yet, but I probably will before too long. I understand about the darker prints. When I do go to prep this one for printing I will "soft-proof" it in Photoshop for the specific printer and paper. I usually use West Coast Imaging in California and print on their Chromira. They provide ICC profiles for soft proofing; a very nice service! Very recently I had this photograph printed by them as a 20x30. Using the soft-proofing the result was very close to the image on the monitor.

Thanks to all! Regards.

Very beautiful image, Walter. I really like the painting of water (it could be interesting as an abstract on its own, just the veil of falling water and then the flow, btw.) and then a nice complementary background... And I also don't think you over-did the sharpening, it's just right as I see it... a beautiful photo...

Jiri

Thanks Jiri, I always welcome and value your opinion. Regards.

and it is really a nit picky observation. I see a very minor blue cast in your highglights. This may very well be a result of the longer exposure, but I was curious if this was noticed or even intentional. I was going to post a before and after image, but the change is so minor I doubt you'd see it unless you were undoing/redoing changes like I was with your image in PS.

Wow Jim, your eyes are better than mine! I thought there was some blue in this and that it should be corrected, but I wasn't sure. If you would like to take the time and do an example edit of it I would be grateful, but really, just your comment bringing it to my attention is good too. Regards.

P.S.: make sure you view this in the LARGER view because I think the compression really tears it apart. Thanks.

Sorry I am late to the discussion. The USM from what I can tell works OK for me. But, the true test of the USM would be to see a large print.

There is however a significant blue cast in the print (most noticable in the highlights in the water).

The composition of the photograph is excellent and so is the exposure. Overall a superb photo IMHO.

I am going to leave this upload as it is, but I am going to color correct the work file before printing. As I examine the work file I come to the conclusion that the blue cast is actually being made even more apparent because of the complimentary yellow background. I think that is visually reinforcing the blue effect. I like the background the way it is, so I will remove about 7.5B from the highlights in the foreground and perhaps about 2.5B from the shadows.

Thank you Jay, and you too Jim, for mentioning this. Have a great Holiday! Regards.

Walter, nicely captured, the veil of water looks very soothing. The falls maybe alittle blue, but I like it. Happy New Year! Sondra

Thanks Sondra, Happy New Year to you too! Regards.

I love it !