marvin Klein Loc: upstate NY

Total agreement with snowBear and docrob
I don't care for HDR either.
I have worked in PS since '90s.nothing like it.

marvin Klein Loc: upstate NY

Ziastars your stuff is showing your artistic eye. Keep it up. You can get very creative in PS. Go off in so many different direction. Stating with a photo and making it into a non-photo art.

Pixelpixie88 Loc: Northern Minnesota

Hi Marvin...I find your comment to Ziastars interesting, (commenting on her artistic eye and the creativity in PS one can get). Yet, you don't like HDR. I think we all agree that HDR when overdone doesn't look good, but a well done photograph in HDR can look artistic. It can also look very natural. (I look at it as someone's form of artwork.) I think it's a fun change to see different people's take on their "artsy" creations. Although...not too many get posted.
Just my thoughts....
:-)

marvin Klein Loc: upstate NY

Pixelpixie88 I also agree with you. What i don't like about HDR is the the are placed into the same photo contests with people that take natural photo and just make tweak the color slightly. There should be to separate contests HDR and what i would call natural photos.

ziastars Loc: Colorado & New Mexico

Thank you for the encouragement Marvin, much appreciated.

George Kravis

Thanks, rpavich, for a clear and logical explanation of some thoughts I've had on the subject.

Pixelpixie88 Loc: Northern Minnesota

Well said.

Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

RP: That is one great justification for shooting with RAW enabled - AND taking 3-shot brackets at + 2eV. This produces unprecedented possibilities in Post using ACR and HDR programs such as Photomatix. Unlimited creative possibilities !!
.
"Natural" photos are like Saturday morning eggs - without salt and pepper !!
Or even worse - without Pace Chunky Picante {medium} ;)
OR Without Ham, Cheese, Onion, Jalapenos, Hash Browns - -
oh heck - - guess it's breakfast time

Allegro23 Loc: Illinois Chicagoland Burbs

Hello, well these are very interesting topics about photography and the comparison to music. I have thought of this comparison recently. In photography is your purpse to reproduce what you saw or cahnge it to what you perceive it should be? In music ( I am a tenor, I played the trumpet before I begain singing, my father was a Tenor and four of his brothers also. We sang opera arias, calssical songs, broadway hits and some pop songs just to give you a little background and also we recorded) you must think the note before you can play it or sing it and it is the brain that knows or doesn't know the sound you are trying to produce. In singing, the sound you hear in your head is not the sound everyone else is hearing. When you see a singer holding his hand behind his ear it is because he is trying to hear himself from the perspective of what everyone else will hear or is hearing. Also when people sing in teh shower it is because of the of the feed back of the acoustic environment of the shower stall. Ansel Adams must have had a great inner picture of what nature looks like even when the picture he was taking was not nature's best. So it appears that his intention was to produce pictures that were of nature at nature's best.

Platterivercarol

I am taking a digital photography class & we had to listen to a speaker the other night. His presentation was on "photographers do not create, they reproduce".
I wanted to walk out, but decided, to each his own. When he showed slides of his "photobook" with diagrams of malls, I just tried to fall asleep. The thing that kept me awake was trying to figure out how he gets paid to speak.
I doubt if he ever read Ansel Adams.
Thanks for the info, I am going to share it with my instructor.

Platterivercarol

I guess I should have said, "I doubt if he knew much about Ansel Adams, or paid any attention to the beauty of his work, let alone "read" anything about him"

Maggie

Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

The good thing about adult education classes is - you are the one paying for them, and if there is a discordant topic presented by a whacko - you are certainly within your rights to leave. At the next class - it would be a simple matter to discuss with your instructor your displeasure with his/her selection of speakers.

mdorn Loc: Portland, OR

Marvin, I'm a little confused... why would it bother you that HDR is placed into the same photo contests with other non-HDR photos? Technically, there really is no such thing as a "natural" photo. First, there is no camera on the planet that can recreate what our eyes see. Secondly, if you use digital, every photo is post processed---either by your camera or by a software app outside the camera. Moreover, there is nothing natural about capturing light and converting it into electrical signals.

Having said this, I think photo contests are really subjective. In this forum, it's about appealing to the likes of as many people as possible. In other contests, it's about appealing to the judges. To win a contest, a large portion of the competition is understanding what you are being judged on and meeting the criteria. If you think HDR has an unfair advantage, then I disagree with you. Of course, this is just my opinion.

WAL

I don't think Adams would add a sky in a photo. That's all part of the today photgraphy.

marvin Klein Loc: upstate NY

Mdorn,
You are right each one of us as an opinion and this discussion can go on for ever. So in my opinion each contest should have rules stated on how much post processing can be done, to a photo once it leaves the camera.