Well, over to the left a little the dam takes an almost 90 degree turn towards where I was standing (old road bridge turned into a walking bridge). The current bridge is just above where the top of those shots end. I thought about going wider, but then I would have had the left side of the falls, the bridge, and/or cars all competing for attention in the shot, along with buildings near the right hand side as well. I decided to go tighter, and lead the water down to the rocks at the bottom, rather then taking a really 'busy' shot.
I did take a couple shots of the left hand side of the falls as well: http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/2628fallsleftfastsm.jpg?4068 http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/2628fallsleftslowsm.jpg?9668 They seemed a bit more bland then the right hand side, although the water coming down onto that rock is pretty interesting. -Andrew On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:11:45 -0400 (EDT), Jerome Reyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/2628fallsrtfastsm.jpg?2947 > > http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/2628fallsrtslowsm.jpg?9074 > > I was experimenting with freezing vs capturing the motion of water. > > > If I had to choose, I'd say that the motion one (2947) seems more suiting > for this subject. I also agree with B. Dayton in that I would've like to > see more of what was going on around this water (i.e., maybe a horizontal > composition and a wider angle)... but then you were there and I wasn't. > This could have indeed been the best composition choice given what you had > to work with. > > Thanks for sharing, > - jerome > >
