HDR - The Marmite of Photography?

D

DoubleTaker

Messages
6
Edit My Images
No
I am personally sick of HDR photography. I feel there is no technical merit behind it whatsoever, and think that once that much post processing is used, a person may as well take up painting and leave their camera at home. I don't want to see an HDR shot when I'm looking through flickr, or magazine on photography!

I am mostly frustrated with how much reverence is paid to HDR photographs - often the winning photograph in a competition is HDR. This is because I see it as a completely different genre to the images it is often being compared to in the same category.

Does anybody else agree that its time HDR forms a separate genre of photography? Perhaps it should be treated as different as portraiture:landscape:macro:HDR etc

Here are some interesting links if you'd like:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/airchinapilot/2312975136/lightbox/
http://www.sovietmontage.com/2010/09/09/hdr-video-a-reality/
http://lewiscollard.com/cameras/hdr-sucks/
http://ihateyourhdr.tumblr.com/


I'd love to hear some opinions.
 
I personally like hdr, that is if it is done properly, there is a lot of people think they are very good at it, but sadly they are just bad. maybe because I am relatively new to it.

There is an element of artistic free hand , I mean you have to take a decent photo (bracket) first, then spend time doing the changes in ps. true it's not everybody's cup of tea. ;)
 
Last edited:
Not quite like Marmite, as that is normally either/or. I think you're talking about OTT HDR. Depending on the image, that either works or it doesn't. :shrug:

90% of the time they don't work imho. ;) :LOL:

Generally if the HDR is the point of the image, without regard for composition, photography technique or point of interest then it's probably not much good. :shrug:


Like every new fad, almost everyone wants to try it out, (a lot easier when it's a post processing fad ;)) some will do it well, most will do it badly, it will then fade out of popularity and then be used occasionally.
 
HDR is like any processing, if the effect is over done then it looks crap, done right it can add a lot to the picture.

Some HDR looks too cartoony but other HDR can add depth to an image.
 
would someone post an example of 'minimal' HDR

then we can all go on our way..:D

a cathedral recently was ok IIRC
 
A good photograph is a good photograph, if it makes you go "wow" then I don't think it matters if its HDR, B&W, cross-processed, Lomo or whatever.

I'm sure it was Ansel Adams who said photographs were made in the darkroom and not in the camera ;)
 
I have seen some excellent examples of HDR recently. I prefer the images that are very subtly done and find the heavily edited ones a bit too ott for my personal taste.
At the end of the day it wouldn't do if we all liked the same styles. It's good to see variety and all styles have a place in a collection.

Andy
 
HDR can be ok if used in moderation, however some peoples images just overcook it totally and ruin the shot.

Its the same with tiltshift techniques such as the lets make everything look tiny crap.
 
HDR can be used for good. However, the usual way it's applied in that you end up with a soft, blotchy, noisy, shadows displaying every shade of colour known to man, no whites, no blacks, no contrast mess, well I just don't see what's possibly visually attractive about it.

Unfortunately Photomatix defaults to the latter.

There is no need for it to be so though:


Gwynfryn Plas, Llanystymdwy by Richard A. Jones, on Flickr


Dinorwic Compressor by Richard A. Jones, on Flickr
 
It's a trend, now seemingly on the decline. I don't use it much, and then only where the dynamic range is more than the camera can deal with. I try to process in such a way that people can't easily tell it's HDR; this is where it has value. I use Photoshop rather than a plug-in, which seems to do the trick for me.

I'm not keen on the stuff that looks as if it came from the set of Metropolis.

Some new toy will be along for Christmas, I imagine. A plug-in that will cost a bit to do something that some practice on PS could achieve just as well. Orton Effect, perhaps? Something fuzzy to contrast with the hard lines that some HDR fans currently enjoy.
 
5582731529_9f2233e623.jpg

This is not mine but I really like it. I think it makes it look 3D.

I like a bit of HDR. I have only done a fue but I can tell if something is a bit over done.
 
You don't like HDR, thats ok I dont like olives on my pizza, we are all different.
Should it be a different genre? No it's all photography.
I think your taking a bit to seriously.
 
swanseamale47 said:
You don't like HDR, thats ok I dont like olives on my pizza, we are all different.
Should it be a different genre? No it's all photography.
I think your taking a bit to seriously.
Click to expand...

:plus1:

I personally hate iphoneography, but I don't start threads complaining about it.

Ignore it move onto the next pic, job done (y)
 
I don't hate it as such, to me it is like any PP overdone is not good and detract from the message. But for some images it really works, just like some other images are better in colour or in b/w etc...

I think any photography not shot on a Nikon should be in a subclass of it own :p
 
I like HDR, though I don't think it fits some subject matters (for me). I like the range of looks you can achieve (from grunge to realistic) and it's just another medium in photographic art. Saying that, since succumbing to landscapes and purchases of Lee filters I haven't done any HDR for a while now.

Really, if you don't like it, don't do it. It really is that simple
 
Personally I think HDR done subetly to alter the dynamic range of an image can look good. If you think about it, darkroom dodging and burning is a form of dynamic range compression, akin to the "mild application" of the tonemapping stage of HDR software.
 
I've seen quite a few HDR shots that I've liked, I've also seen a lot that I haven't - I've probably seen quite a few and not realised they were HDR! At the end of the day it's a tool, and nothing more. How it is used by the individual, and the image it is used on will determine how good the end result is.

Not liking olives on your pizza though??? That's just weird -:naughty:
 
I quite like using HDR for interior shots mostly.

3434689049_f8ff54a1b5_z.jpg


3148347478_9d97415a74_z.jpg


HDR doesn't mix with fine art landscapes for me tho. I have used it for exterior images but mostly experimental...

2866269374_dc69b4b0dd_z.jpg


4182052034_313605276d.jpg


... and on occasions I like a bit of slider fun...

4757960669_31d26184a6.jpg
 
HDR is no different to any other form of photography.

One either like the image presented or one doesen't, it subjective.

D in W
 
Can't be like marmite - marmite is disgusting, but HDR is a useful tool.

I agree that there are too many images where the HDR effect is grossly over emphasised, but used properly it allows images to be captured that otherwise would be impossible. One of my interests is churches and in photographing the interiors, HDR comes into its own.

horning_st_benedicts_12.jpg
 
Personally i hate hdr, but recently there have been a few that i have thought 'thats quite nicely done' then i see an ott and i think Oh God!
 
Surely its a tool that only adds to a photographers tool box. It is like Marmite - some are done with taste and others make you want to rub your tongue across a carpet. :)
 
Digifrog said:
I quite like using HDR for interior shots mostly.

3434689049_f8ff54a1b5_z.jpg


3148347478_9d97415a74_z.jpg


HDR doesn't mix with fine art landscapes for me tho. I have used it for exterior images but mostly experimental...

2866269374_dc69b4b0dd_z.jpg


4182052034_313605276d.jpg


... and on occasions I like a bit of slider fun...

4757960669_31d26184a6.jpg
Click to expand...

Wow superb. :clap:
 
im having a play with HDR and getting mixed results so not quite sure at present..
 
Last edited:
Not really a fan of the over-processed hdr look. Its got that "once you seen one, you seen 'em all" thing about it.
 
carl.w said:
Wow superb. :clap:
Click to expand...

Thanks Carl, I'm glad you like them.

I haven't done any HDR for months now but my most recent is a return to it. It's part of a project I'm working on right now. I chose the process to emphasize nostalgia as I see it.


5847734389_25817d22bc_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
There's nothing wrong with HDR 'done right'. It's the heavily processed images that look like a bad computer render that give it a bad name!
 
The worst thing with HDR is when people use it on a scene that did not have any high contrast areas, like outside in the middle of the day with the sun behind you...
 
Why hello there thread :D

I cannot stand overdone HDR, if I look at my screen and have to recoil because it's blinding me then it's a bad bad photo. There is more than one example of this in this thread already.

I am of the opinion that it's not so much the marmite of photography - it's the emperor's new clothes. What really really winds me up is the people going "oh wow great shot amazing!" when ever they see an example. HDR isn't amazing or hard, you plug 1 or more photos into photomatrix which then does all the work for you. A monkey could do it.

Sure there are nice examples and that's fine and dandy but it encourages people to have a go themselves with horrible results 99% of the time, Facebook/flicker contacts all go nuts and you get 50 "oh my god look how talented you are" posts which encourages more people to have a go....and so the circle of bad continues.

Please gods of the dark room, make this fad die soon soon, please.

edit: This is another thing I hate about HDR, I just took one of my photos and ran it through. Mainly because I want to see what comments it gets.


Using HDR to cover up for a bad exposure by Learnin' Curve, on Flickr

It is not a good shot, it is something to hide.
 
Last edited:
Love some of the interior pics and I would like to have a go at HDR, but not sure what is the best software to use.

Without wishing to highjack this thread i was wondering what has been used for these shots?
 
The souls of David Bailey, Ansel Adams and Philippe Halsman.
 
I like HDR, Just need to remember not to go OTT.
 
hamster100 said:
Love some of the interior pics and I would like to have a go at HDR, but not sure what is the best software to use.

Without wishing to highjack this thread i was wondering what has been used for these shots?
Click to expand...

The most popular software is Photomatix. Another program would be H.D.R. Efex Pro from acclaimed Nik Software.

http://www.niksoftware.com/hdrefexpro/usa/entry.php

I'm not sure but I think Nik H.D.R. Efex Pro only runs on 64bit PC's.
.
Rgds
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top