To HDR or not to HDR, that is the question.
Sep 16, 2013 15:46:29 #
Im new here and I hope I dont ruffle any feathers by giving my opinion about something. Hopefully any rebuttals will be reasoned and polite; I left my flame suit at home. Here goes
I would guess Ive looked at 50 image posts in the few weeks Ive been here and Ive posted a few myself. What I see with Frightening Frequency is the suggestion that one image or another would look better in HDR. When I see an HDR processed shot, 99% of the time my brain screams FAKE. HDR, if used subtly may have its place but unfortunately most of the time I think it is grotesquely over used. To me at least it almost always looks like a gimmick.
When I shoot, I shoot for Mood. I am concerned with DOF, composition, angle of view and capturing the feeling of the scene. If I hate the light, Ill come back when its better. I am much more interested in getting the fundamentals of a good photo down than I am in pumping up the dynamic range artificially.
This of course is just my opinion. Shoot how and what you want. I simply have very little use for HDR myself. Thats my story and Im sticking to it.
I would guess Ive looked at 50 image posts in the few weeks Ive been here and Ive posted a few myself. What I see with Frightening Frequency is the suggestion that one image or another would look better in HDR. When I see an HDR processed shot, 99% of the time my brain screams FAKE. HDR, if used subtly may have its place but unfortunately most of the time I think it is grotesquely over used. To me at least it almost always looks like a gimmick.
When I shoot, I shoot for Mood. I am concerned with DOF, composition, angle of view and capturing the feeling of the scene. If I hate the light, Ill come back when its better. I am much more interested in getting the fundamentals of a good photo down than I am in pumping up the dynamic range artificially.
This of course is just my opinion. Shoot how and what you want. I simply have very little use for HDR myself. Thats my story and Im sticking to it.
Sep 16, 2013 16:02:03 #
In daily life when you look at pictures in magazines for example, you are often looking at HDR, but you do not notice it because it is properly used. Those 99% you mention is mostly overcooked HDR that is not looking nice or beautiful at all. And that is why you notice it! - partly, at least. There are hundreds or thousands of possible different HDR from one pic, that is one of the advantages of HDR, it is not one fixed setting, HDR is a way of processing that can give you beautiful results that you never think is HDR at all - and everything from there to the "Fake" looking overdone HDR that you mention. But I am sure you have seen lot of beautiful HDR pics that you like. You just do not know it is HDR because it is properly done.
Sep 16, 2013 16:03:20 #
HDR can be good when someone takes the time to edit each layer for the light density that was created. What happens most of the time more often than not, is that someone lets Photomatix do all teh work for them and go with the "pain"terly setting or the "Set Contrast and Saturation to 1000" mode and call it good.
Sometimes extra work is needed to flatten those saturated layers to give a more realistic look instead of what normally is presented as HDR.
I personally enjoy making them when I do make them. My tastes lean them towards more real looking than cartoonish.
Sometimes extra work is needed to flatten those saturated layers to give a more realistic look instead of what normally is presented as HDR.
I personally enjoy making them when I do make them. My tastes lean them towards more real looking than cartoonish.
Sep 16, 2013 16:05:55 #
I'm a professional photographer and I sincerely doubt that it's is used as often as you think. Yes, it's fine when used properly. The problem mostly lies in it's over use, which is rampent.
Sep 16, 2013 16:06:35 #
Your user name is an act of great boldness! More power to you!
HDR is a tool, just like your camera, or computer, to be used in achieving a desired result. Many people are happy with the unrealistic colors, or the halos they get with HDR. These things do not appeal to me, but that's okay.
The hammer doesn't bend the nail.
Good topic! Thank you!
HDR is a tool, just like your camera, or computer, to be used in achieving a desired result. Many people are happy with the unrealistic colors, or the halos they get with HDR. These things do not appeal to me, but that's okay.
The hammer doesn't bend the nail.
Good topic! Thank you!
Sep 16, 2013 16:09:05 #
Most agree that a large (dwindling)% of the HDR are over processed.
HDR is a tool within the photography realm, when used it is properly Very Good results are achieved. Compare it to infrared when it was new. If you do it normally HDR has a long learning curve.
HDR is a tool within the photography realm, when used it is properly Very Good results are achieved. Compare it to infrared when it was new. If you do it normally HDR has a long learning curve.
Sep 16, 2013 16:09:18 #
Manray,
HDR is just another style of photographic art. As with any type of art, there will be some genre that you you like and others that you do not find appealing. I guess the same can apply to music,dance, theater and cinema. Pursue that which brings you joy.
As JPL said, HDR can be so subtle on images that you see on a daily basis in adverts that you would never imagine that it is being used.
HDR is just another style of photographic art. As with any type of art, there will be some genre that you you like and others that you do not find appealing. I guess the same can apply to music,dance, theater and cinema. Pursue that which brings you joy.
As JPL said, HDR can be so subtle on images that you see on a daily basis in adverts that you would never imagine that it is being used.
Sep 16, 2013 16:09:19 #
JPL wrote:
In daily life when you look at pictures in magazin... (show quote)
Or they are shot on 80mp digital backs and are not HDR and are just shot with tools that carry a much wider dynamic range than your entry level canon camera with kit lens, and is most likely the case.
Sep 16, 2013 16:10:09 #
Musket wrote:
Or they are shot on 80mp digital backs and are not HDR and are just shot with tools that carry a much wider dynamic range than your entry level canon camera with kit lens, and is most likely the case.
+1
Sep 16, 2013 16:11:01 #
Sep 16, 2013 16:12:13 #
Musket wrote:
Or they are shot on 80mp digital backs and are not HDR and are just shot with tools that carry a much wider dynamic range than your entry level canon camera with kit lens, and is most likely the case.
Also true, however outside of photo journalism and "some" Wildlife photographers, most images that are seen have had significant PP.
Sep 16, 2013 16:13:14 #
Danilo wrote:
Your user name is an act of great boldness! More power to you!
HDR is a tool, just like your camera, or computer, to be used in achieving a desired result. Many people are happy with the unrealistic colors, or the halos they get with HDR. These things do not appeal to me, but that's okay.
The hammer doesn't bend the nail.
Good topic! Thank you!
HDR is a tool, just like your camera, or computer, to be used in achieving a desired result. Many people are happy with the unrealistic colors, or the halos they get with HDR. These things do not appeal to me, but that's okay.
The hammer doesn't bend the nail.
Good topic! Thank you!
You are 100% correct and people should use whatever tool they need for their own vision. The thing that bugs me is... becides over the top use (which is my problem), it simply isn't the answer for everything. Sometimes waiting for the light to change will give you a better result.
Sep 16, 2013 16:20:58 #
Samuraiz wrote:
Also true, however outside of photo journalism and "some" Wildlife photographers, most images that are seen have had significant PP.
True, but that isn't the subject at hand. It would however be an interesting topic. Even "Straight" photographers like Ansel Adams did a great deal of darkroom manipulation. So where do we draw the line?
Sep 16, 2013 16:25:27 #
Danilo wrote:
Your user name is an act of great boldness! More power to you!
HDR is a tool, just like your camera, or computer, to be used in achieving a desired result. Many people are happy with the unrealistic colors, or the halos they get with HDR. These things do not appeal to me, but that's okay.
The hammer doesn't bend the nail.
Good topic! Thank you!
HDR is a tool, just like your camera, or computer, to be used in achieving a desired result. Many people are happy with the unrealistic colors, or the halos they get with HDR. These things do not appeal to me, but that's okay.
The hammer doesn't bend the nail.
Good topic! Thank you!
The name choice is a homage to my favorite artist/photographer. Nothing more
:-)
Sep 16, 2013 16:36:11 #
ManRay 1 wrote:
...So where do we draw the line?
you're assuming that a line needs to be drawn...why draw a line...you like black and white...doesn't look 'real' to me...so where do we draw the line...?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.