I won't claim to be a great
photographer. I won't even claim to be
a good photographer. But over the years
I've spent photographing waterfalls, I've learned
a few things that I'm sure can help you to take
a better picture. Waterfalls aren't the
easiest subjects to photograph, but hopefully
the tips and insights listed below can help improve
anything that needs improving upon. I'm
writing this guide assuming that you, the reader,
have adequate knowledge of how your camera works,
how to control f/stops and shutter speeds (you
can find this information in your camera manual).
The medium you choose to use depends largely
on your personal preference and what kind of
gear you own. I can't say that Film has
any edge over Digital, or vice versa, in terms
of taking pictures of waterfalls, but there are
upsides and downsides to both formats.
Digital usually provides a much more accurate
representation of color than film does. Having
a user-programmable white balance can take care
of any unwanted blue hues created by shade or
overcast conditions. Up to this point in
time, Digital has all but overtaken 35mm film
in terms of detail. Lower end digital cameras
still lean towards the 'not quite' side of the
line, but the newer entry level DSLR cameras
that are available (Canon Digital Rebel, Nikon
D70, Olympus E300, Konica Minolta 7D) all produce
images which have the potential to
better the quality of 35mm transparency film. There
are a few downsides to Digital however. Given
harder lighting, most digital cameras seem to
have a
narrower dynamic range, and more often than not,
seem to blow out highlights in bright areas of
images - in our case, waterfalls. This
doesn't happen all the time, and can be corrected
some of the time, but can be a nuisance.
Film cameras, on the other hand, are cheaper,
have less components that could fail, and usually
have a much broader dynamic range than digital. Not
always is this the case - since most entry level
35mm cameras are complete junk when compared
to entry level digital - but when dealing with
35mm SLR cameras, there are definite advantages. Transparency
film continues to show a better dynamic range
of color and tones, and usually produces better
exposures than digital. Some Film manufacturers
also engineer their films to produce stronger
colors at one point in the spectrum (Fuji Velvia
with it's strong blue hues, etc). This
can be both a positive and negative, depending
on who you talk to. The downsides to film
are probably as obvious: not being able to see
the results of the image before leaving, the
cost of processing and enlargements, lack of
ability to change the sensitivity of the film,
etc.
Personally, being a digital guy, I
wouldn't recommend film to anybody who is looking
to start out in photography. I would, however,
recommend those interested in photography as
a serious hobby or profession get hold of a medium
or large format film camera at some point. Digital
cameras have yet to match the quality of 6x6
or 645 medium format films, and certainly not
4x5 inch large format films (though the very
expensive high end digitals are getting very
close), and these sizes are ideal for detailed
nature and landscape photography for those willing
to carry around the extra gear.
In respect to photographing waterfalls specifically,
there is no right or wrong choice. What
there is is two different mindsets: film and
digital. When
you shoot digital, you have to think of the picture
results as a digital camera would produce them. Likewise
with film. As I said above, digital cameras
tend to lean towards blowing out highlights in
hard light, so compensating for the exposure
is something to consider. This will be
explained further below.
This is big issue number one. The ISO
of the film or sensor you use with your camera
determines a great deal of how your waterfall
photographs turn out. In the film world,
higher ISO means smaller film grain, more sensitivity
and a faster exposure. This also means
that the resulting pictures won't be as sharp
and may appear full of speckles upon closer inspection. For
digital, the ISO of the camera determines the
sensitivity of the camera's sensor. Digital
cameras usually have at least 3, if not 4 or
more ISO settings - ranging from 25 to 6400. With
digital cameras, the greater the sensitivity
of the sensor, the greater the variance in light
registering on the sensor. High ISO settings
produce higher noise - essentially the same as
grain in high ISO films, but harsher. For
waterfall photography, use the slowest speed
(lowest number) possible. For film, this
is usually ISO 25 or 50, and for Digital, usually
ISO 50 or 100. Not only does this increase
the amount of detail, it also increases the amount
of light necessary to make a proper exposure,
and thusly allowing for longer exposures.
So, why would you want a longer exposure, you
ask? Well, slow shutter speeds result in
the graceful "cotton candy" effect
commonly seen in waterfall pictures (which I
try to produce
as much as possible). Most
professional photographers use long exposures
on waterfall studies at some point or another
in their career The resulting pictures
have a much more graceful feel. Not all
waterfalls are good studies for slow shutter
photography, however. For waterfalls of
either great height or volume, slow shutter
speeds more often than not serve to lessen -
or even mute altogether - any feeling of power
which faster shutter speeds may convey. Here
is where you ask "So when do I use one and when
do I use the other"? Read on.
Slow shutter studies are generally best used
for waterfalls with small volume, heavy contact
with
bedrock, or in isolation studies. There
are, of course, exceptions to this thinking -
Nooksack Falls comes to mind - but in the broadest
sense, smaller waterfalls are much more conducive
to slow shutter photography. One thing
to keep in mind is that the taller the waterfall,
the longer it takes the falling water to blur
evenly. I usually try to expose about 1
second for every 100 feet of height in the waterfall. In
some cases, like Multnomah
Falls, longer exposures
are necessary (I've shot exposures of Multnomah
over 10 seconds in length). For smaller
waterfalls, shutter speeds from about 1/20th
of a second and slower will achieve the proper
blurring of the water.
Fast shutter speed studies are usually best
used to convey the power or size of a waterfall,
or in some cases, in isolation studies as well. For
some of the world's tallest waterfalls, like
Depot Creek Falls or British Columbia's Takakkaw
Falls, a fast exposure can much more clearly
define both the size of the falls, as well as
the force and directions the water falls in. Fast
exposures typically work best in brightly lit
scenes, or scenes where the lighting is uneven
(undesirable). Fast exposures should also
be used if you don't have a tripod to work with,
because it is impossible to hand hold a camera
steady enough to prevent image blurring (unless
the camera or lens has image stabilization build
in). Shutter
speeds of 1/60th of a second or faster will negate
the need for a tripod.
The camera's aperture comes into play in order
to set the shutter speed to the desired setting. For
slow shutter photography, the aperture should
always be stopped down as far as it can be -
usually anywhere between f/22 and f/36 on SLR
cameras,
and between f/6 and f/11 on digital cameras. Not
only does this ensure that the scene is completely
in focus, it also decreases the amount of light
entering the lens, which increases the necessary
length of the exposure. I personally feel
that when photographing waterfalls, the aperture
should be restricted to the smallest size
possible to maintain a sharp scene overall. In
brightly lit scenes, this may not always be the
case, however, so just experiment and see what
works.
Lighting can make or break a scene. Here
in the Northwest, lighting can change on a dime,
so it helps to understand how certain lighting
will effect the outcome of your pictures. When
photographing most waterfalls, the absolute ideal
lighting conditions are overcast days. Cloud
cover acts as a diffuser which allows the light
to fall on the scene completely evenly, which
in turn results in a more balanced image, contrast-wise. There
are certain conditions where direct sunlight
is favorable, however. Waterfalls which
have dramatic backdrops, such as Myrtle
Falls with Mount Rainier looming behind, are much better
suited for clear days when the whole scene can
be fully appreciated.
Issues with lighting come into play when there
are either scattered clouds, or no clouds, and
your subject is surrounded by objects which cast
shadows on the scene (trees, cliffs, etc). Bright
sunlight and shadows in the same scene doesn't
present an issue for human eyes, but because
no camera yet has the dynamic range of the human
eye, pictures of the same scene will not appear
the same. In situations like these, it
can be hard to produce a good picture, so don't
get your hopes up. My best advice is to
take a few shots at different shutter speeds,
metering off of different areas of the scene,
and hoping for the best. Obviously if you
have a digital camera, this is much easier than
if you shoot film.
While using Filters on your lenses isn't a requirement
by any means, there are several which can only
serve to improve your waterfall photographs. Chances
are that if you have a camera which will accept
filters (higher end digital cameras and SLRs),
you may have considered it at some point or another.
The most important filter to carry when photographing
waterfalls is the Polarizer. Polarizing
filters do two things: saturate the colors of
the image, and reduce or remove glare on reflective
surfaces. The one catch with polarizers
is that they only work to maximum efficiency
at a 180 degree angle to the light source (in
this case, the sun), so if the sun is in front
of you, a polarizer will be useless, but if it's
behind you, it will work perfectly. In
terms of waterfall photography, the Polarizer is best for reducing glare on wet rock next to
the waterfall itself, to help focus attention
on the waterfall. If foliage around the
waterfall, or whatever you are photographing,
is wet, the polarizer will reduce the glare on
the leaves, and make the greens stronger as well.
The second most important filter, in my opinion,
is the 81A Warming Filter.
When taking pictures in a shaded area - particularly
when dealing with waterfalls - the resulting picture
will naturally tend towards the blue side of the
spectrum. Using a 81A in
a situation like this will remove the majority
of the blue hue, and the resulting picture will
be much closer to what you see with your eyes.
The Neutral Density filter is also quite useful. This
filter is simply a smoky piece of glass
which reduces the amount of light that passes
through the lens. Putting a Neutral
Density filter on your camera allows you to take longer
exposures - something which is recommended when
photographing waterfalls.
Other useful, though less important filters
can lend certain things to your photographs,
but usually require more experimentation to evaluate
the usefulness. A UV / Skylight filter
is useful for cutting haze seen in your telephoto
lenses. An Enhancing Filter, used to saturate
the image, is useful when taking pictures of
colorful scenes - particularly fall foliage scenes. A
Graduated Neutral Density Filter is necessary
to take balanced pictures of sunsets, or scenes
where half of the frame is brightly lit and half
is shaded. Usually this filter isn't terribly
useful for photographing waterfalls, but there
are several outstanding cases.
Composition is the touchiest subject I'll cover
here, mainly because there is no right and wrong
way to do it. If you've ever taken a class
on photography, you're most certainly aware of
the rule of thirds. Those of you who don't
know what that is, the basic concept is to divide
the image into three equal parts using whatever
natural lines there are, so that horizon lines
aren't dead center in the image, but rather top
or bottom centered. Further, offsetting
the focal point of the image to the left or right
of the center of the frame also adds a significant
amount of interest to the composition. This
site isn't exactly the bastion for photography
tutorials, as I try to use more straight forward
pictures here because the primary purpose of
this site is documentation, so don't use my pictures
as the end-all example of how to photograph waterfalls,
but they can at least give you some place to
start from.
|
