No. 2 is a better composition. The first one shows a lot of extraneous portions that are unattractive. Better photographers generally compose tighter and tighter to their subjects!

I hate to sound a negative note, because I really admire your work. However, I don't think either picture comes up to the high standards you have set for yourself.When I look at the pictures, my eye is immediately drawn to the brightest part of the image. However, the subject of the picture is the waterfall in the darker part of the picture. Want you want obviously is for eye to be drawn to the subject, not away from it.One of the favorite sayings of a photography instructor I once had was "the sky is not your friend". What he meant was that the eye is always drawn to the brightest part of a picture, and you don't want the brightest part taking you eye away from the subject.I am sure others will disagree, but that was my honest reaction. -- Jim http://www.pbase.com/jcassatt

1st one, looks complete. -- KF http://www.flickr.com/photos/kromefoto/

I like a slightly different crop which I made, I posted it below.The forground curve in your first one is distracting to me, and looks like the curve a stitched panorama effect sometimes causes. Your second is closer in and better but I think takes out a little too much. My crop is 1.5 ratio and looks balanced to my eyes - the waterfall is big enough to show it is the key subject, but there are enough other elements for your eyes to wander around to see, particularly plenty of the cool dark water streams on the left. The foreground rocks now provide a bit of natural framing/vignetting, but not enough to distract. The waterfall is not on the classic thirds but is enough off-centre to give an impression of movement towards the right side of the photo. Anyway, it works for me.Nice photo!

Jim Cassattwrote:I hate to sound a negative note, because I really admire your work. However, I don't think either picture comes up to the high standards you have set for yourself.The lighting on this one isn't good with the waterfall completely in the shadows. But if the OP wants to print "big" for the sake of printing "big", have at it. You gotta have good or appropriate light!

If only tight composition is accepted, why do they sell wide angle lenses? Tight composition isn't a rule that fits all the cases. It is a good practice for certain subjects.RedFox88wrote:No. 2 is a better composition. The first one shows a lot of extraneous portions that are unattractive. Better photographers generally compose tighter and tighter to their subjects!

I think two prints are a good idea, but if I had to choose one, I'd go with #2. #1 shadows are too deep on the left and take away visually from the falls and the snowcovered bowl.No snow. Frost. The water falling makes moisture in the air that freezes and makes frost where it lands. Ice cicles hanging from the falls if you look in a big print too. It was about 0 deg. F when I was there. COLD.

Looking at it again, I guess if you crop out a bit of the right side to get rid of the branches in the upper right corner you'll be cutting it too close to the water on the lower right side.That is why I left the tree branches on the right side. If you crop, it puts the edge into the pool at the bottom.Do you have a good printing shop/site recommendation?Magnachrome. Great Prints. Good Prices. For about the last two years, I haven't had prints done anywhere else.

Curve of the pond makes theshot.I am very partial to the full pool of the pond too.

I hate to agree, but I do. I agree with your comments about the light drawing the viewer from the subject. That is why I shot this in 2007, but havn't printed it yet. Maybe I will just have to return and reshoot.This is the "post card" view you see in the gift shop.and this is the predawn shot without the distracting sunrise lightI didn't make it down to the bottom for the panoramic shot of the falls and pool until sunrise hit the treetops. I think that is the best view, but I didn't get it in the best light.I hate to sound a negative note, because I really admire your work. However, I don't think either picture comes up to the high standards you have set for yourself.When I look at the pictures, my eye is immediately drawn to the brightest part of the image. However, the subject of the picture is the waterfall in the darker part of the picture. Want you want obviously is for eye to be drawn to the subject, not away from it.One of the favorite sayings of a photography instructor I once had was "the sky is not your friend". What he meant was that the eye is always drawn to the brightest part of a picture, and you don't want the brightest part taking you eye away from the subject.I am sure others will disagree, but that was my honest reaction. -- Jim http://www.pbase.com/jcassatt

I like a slightly different crop which I made, I posted it below.I like your crop. Thanks!

Thanks for all the help and comments.If I print anything, it will be the Full View. I am still debating if I should drive back and reshoot. Its only a 10 hour drive, winter is not over there yet...

Obviously from the different comments, it is a crapshoot. Both are good -- The first camera bag you buy is always too smallhttp://www.flickr.com/geofiz