Post your Realistic 'HDR'
- Thread starter petemc
- Start date
- Messages
- 2,498
- Name
- Nathan Hulse
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I had to look at the Cathedral/church shot twice, to check the difference. I'd go so far as to say I prefer the first.
There are also quite a few shots that have been posted that I would not have guessed were tone mapped/HDR and just looked good photographic technique. Eg some of Ghandi's, Jo's (stunning portfolio on your web site) and KenKo1964, stick out to me.
Interesting topic. For me there are 3 not-so-distinct types of HDR: 1. subtle and barely noticeable, 2. noticable-but-not-detrimental and 3. OTT. I try to keep in group1. I think they look the best generally. However when it suits, I'll wander into group2. I avoid group3 at all costs. I've seen some ace shots in this group, but it's just not for me. Out of the shots below I'd say there are 2, maybe 3, that are in group2...
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
- Messages
- 222
- Name
- Martin Prothero
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Its all in the eye of the individual...
If a 50mm normal lens (28ish on crop a DSLR) is supposed to be as the eye sees, it is considered natural.
Is it OTT if we use a 10mm wideangle or a 400mm tele? Afterall its not what the eye sees and yet its well accepted even by those that might object to HDR on the grounds that its not natural.
Erm, nothing in digital photography is natural, it is all fabricated to a greater or lesser degree, and that's where personal taste comes in.
I quote U2's Bono "Taste is the enemy of art"
If a 50mm normal lens (28ish on crop a DSLR) is supposed to be as the eye sees, it is considered natural.
Is it OTT if we use a 10mm wideangle or a 400mm tele? Afterall its not what the eye sees and yet its well accepted even by those that might object to HDR on the grounds that its not natural.
Erm, nothing in digital photography is natural, it is all fabricated to a greater or lesser degree, and that's where personal taste comes in.
I quote U2's Bono "Taste is the enemy of art"
Les McLean
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,793
- Name
- Les
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If HDR produced spectacular images, then I could understand folk getting miffed, that's not the case, probably the reverse, quite often making good images terrible.
Put it this way, if HDR (or tone mapping) was so brilliant, why hasn't it taken the photo world by storm?
Never see it in photomags, the odd article appears, but it's generally a peripheral interest.
Never see it in glossy magazines, never see it in photo-galleries.
It's a bit like when photoshop became popular, you saw loads of over-processed, garish images, togs had a new toy, so they overdosed on it, luckily that exuberance died down, and a more restrained approach became the norm.
It's happening with HDR, in that some togs can't see the woods for the trees, in that they are unable to understand what is important in an image because they are giving too much attention to detail.
I've seen tone mapped images in advertising, hell I've supplied them to be used all over Europe. I've had my stuff published 3 times in UK photomags including Pro Photographer. I also gave a talk on HDR at a major photography gallery. I've got another lined up with the British Institute of Professional Photography too. There's only like 4 true photography galleries in the UK and have you seen some of the nonsense they have? I once saw an exhibition on office life. Really dull bland photos of photocopiers, office chairs and such. Many people have commented to me that they would prefer to see my work over that so thats just what I'm doing. I'm holding an exhibition of my work in a great location. I've already got support from local radio and I've been told the papers will be interested too. I'm currently working on 2 books that will feature HDR images too. You can't go a day without seeing a hdr image in the top 500 of Flickr. Oh and I currently have a HDR image in the National Media Museum in Bradford too. It was picked out of over 23,000 images by the BBC. Maybe in your photo circles its not popular but it sure as hell is in mine
Dave Hill's photos aren't HDR but are clearly heavily processed and he's got some big name clients.
Les McLean
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,793
- Name
- Les
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Pete, but yours is a very small circle, but who knows, it may become mainstream one day.
Firstly I am not talking as a good tog and I haven't yet tried hdr myself but probably will sometime so these are just my thoughts having seen other peoples shots on forums.
I just find it a technique that can produce an intial wow factor when I first open an image but then when I look closer it dissappoints. As said previously if the underlying photo is dull then hdr is unlikely to save it. (the other technique that is similarly used is tilting the camera - a dull photo is still dull even at 30 degrees) Of course there are many dull photos (including mine) but I think it is the 'mutton dressed as lamb' nature of hdr that makes people pick on it.
I think it is also a effect that I find 'tiring' in large doses even if it is well done. I remember a post of pete's that had about 8 hdr pics and many were also tilted. Each one individually was a great photo and I liked them all but en masse they were too much for me. It has become quite a common technique and perhaps people are a bit fatigued?
More speciffically I find hdr shots often have garish primary colours with no subtlety of tone and the high contrast edgy/bitty look. I think that may be due to the poor technique and judgement of the tog. I think to use it well takes a lot of practice to really understand it and technical skill to produce a 'good' image with it. One of the most natural hdr shots I have seen was taken by a pro tog and used 7 close exposures. I don't understand the process myself but I wonder whether the highly unnatural look comes from using too few or exposures too far apart or using three tweaked versions of the same exposure?
Obviously these forums are mostly beginners and amateurs (myself very much included) who are learning and experimenting and hdr is something that people are trying.
I do often find pp used too heavily anyway. Some people seem to have a very radioactive view of the world when it comes to colour for instance but I always have problems judging how much of a tweak to give photos - it is much easier to see where others have gone 'wrong' than do it myself
btw I meant to say, there are some great shots in this thread that prove hdr can be used well.
I just find it a technique that can produce an intial wow factor when I first open an image but then when I look closer it dissappoints. As said previously if the underlying photo is dull then hdr is unlikely to save it. (the other technique that is similarly used is tilting the camera - a dull photo is still dull even at 30 degrees) Of course there are many dull photos (including mine
) but I think it is the 'mutton dressed as lamb' nature of hdr that makes people pick on it.I think it is also a effect that I find 'tiring' in large doses even if it is well done. I remember a post of pete's that had about 8 hdr pics and many were also tilted. Each one individually was a great photo and I liked them all but en masse they were too much for me. It has become quite a common technique and perhaps people are a bit fatigued?
More speciffically I find hdr shots often have garish primary colours with no subtlety of tone and the high contrast edgy/bitty look. I think that may be due to the poor technique and judgement of the tog. I think to use it well takes a lot of practice to really understand it and technical skill to produce a 'good' image with it. One of the most natural hdr shots I have seen was taken by a pro tog and used 7 close exposures. I don't understand the process myself but I wonder whether the highly unnatural look comes from using too few or exposures too far apart or using three tweaked versions of the same exposure?
Obviously these forums are mostly beginners and amateurs (myself very much included) who are learning and experimenting and hdr is something that people are trying.
I do often find pp used too heavily anyway. Some people seem to have a very radioactive view of the world when it comes to colour for instance but I always have problems judging how much of a tweak to give photos - it is much easier to see where others have gone 'wrong' than do it myself
btw I meant to say, there are some great shots in this thread that prove hdr can be used well.
You've clearly got circle envy
Also, I don't just do HDR. I haven't done any in months so my circle isn't just hdr people.
Les McLean
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 6,793
- Name
- Les
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You've clearly got circle envy
LOL, you picked the fight
- Messages
- 4,379
- Edit My Images
- Yes
