HDR Photograhpy Old Timers Opinions: Hi everyone, I would like to get the opinions of those that have been doing photography of lets say for the last 30 to 40 years on HDR photography.

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

Hi everyone, I would like to get the opinions of those that have been doing photography of lets say for the last 30 to 40 years on HDR photography.

In your opinion, does it take away from the integrity of photography? Or do you look at it as another welcome form of self expression?

Others feel free to chime in of course. But would love to hear from those that have been doing this for a long time and were a definite a part of the evolution.

Thanks in advance

nakkh Loc: San Mateo, Ca

80-85% of the time I don't like the result of an HDR photo. They just look garish & over processed to me. But every now and then you'll get a great HDR photo. It's all about subtlety ... but then again most of the time... Gaah!

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

soba1 wrote:

Hi everyone, I would like to get the opinions of those that have been doing photography of lets say for the last 30 to 40 years on HDR photography.

In your opinion, does it take away from the integrity of photography? Or do you look at it as another welcome form of self expression?

Others feel free to chime in of course. But would love to hear from those that have been doing this for a long time and were a definite a part of the evolution.

Thanks in advance

Gustave Le Gray combined plates to get the right dynamic range. The plates were mainly blue sensitive leading to white skies with a proper ground. Another exposure was made with properly exposed sky but underexposed ground. The plates were then layer during printing.

http://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/le_gray/

I do not think HDR damages photography. However, I do not like the aesthetic. People go too far and eliminate all shadows. The haloing that occurs is also troublesome. It looks awful. If you look at Ansel Adams' The Print, he explains why such haloing looks bad. Yes, it also occurred in the darkroom as a result of sloppy dodging and burning.

dooragdragon Loc: Alma , Arkansas

While my experiance goes back only 25 yrs , 99.8% of the stuff I see looks like it belongs in a art section not a photography section.
Its gone to far and loses the true intregity of a photo , and yes i have posted some doctored photos with a neon effect I don't consider that the same.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

I'm not as old as many here, but I'll add my 2cents.
I think HDR is a great thing. I've not used it much, but do have some special plans for it.
It's just another tool, it can be used, abused, or applied with extreme skill. I've seen some stunning HDR, and yes, I've some stuff that's less than stellar.
But every PP mode is abused, and some just dont know how to use it to an advantage. But that's every aspect of photography, so nothing new there.
But who's to label what's good and what's bad??!! You??!! :lol:
SS

Photocraig

Back in the day, HDR required sufficient darkroom skills that automatically separated the seasoned photographers from t'others. The results were unusual and breathtaking.

Today, with the tools available, in camera, no less, it is certain that people will use them somewhat less discriminately. With predictable results.

The same could be said for effects like color--Gee Whizzz. Or toning or re-touching or air brushing or dodging or burning, or push processing or alternative developers, or fixers, or maybe even a patina from an Enlarger Lens.

With the experience and hard earned craftsmanship, hopefully comes restraint and tasteful application of "technique." With the ability to get an effect, appropriate or not, with a mouse click, perhaps one's artistic decision making hasn't caught up to the technology.

Remember the old saying, "Just because you can doesn't mean that you should."

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

Photocraig wrote:

Back in the day, HDR required sufficient darkroom ... (show quote)

I agree with these sentiments entirely - well expressed.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

soba1 wrote:

Hi everyone, I would like to get the opinions of those that have been doing photography of lets say for the last 30 to 40 years on HDR photography.

In your opinion, does it take away from the integrity of photography? Or do you look at it as another welcome form of self expression?

Others feel free to chime in of course. But would love to hear from those that have been doing this for a long time and were a definite a part of the evolution.

Thanks in advance

During my 50+ years of periodic engagement in photography I have not tried but I may get around to it.

I have seen some examples that I liked and others I didn't.

Its a matter of taste and I see nothing wrong with it.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

soba1 wrote:

Hi everyone, I would like to get the opinions of those that have been doing photography of lets say for the last 30 to 40 years on HDR photography.

In your opinion, does it take away from the integrity of photography? Or do you look at it as another welcome form of self expression?

Others feel free to chime in of course. But would love to hear from those that have been doing this for a long time and were a definite a part of the evolution.

Thanks in advance

Like any image enhancement technique - it's good when it's done with care, and ugly when it's overdone.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

HDR is ruining your photo

grandmadeb Loc: illinois, usa

I like some of the HDR that I see, others not so much. I like more realistic captures.

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

if not over done it can be quite useful in saving difficult scenes ie. lighting conditions. at the photographers discretion it can add some nice enhancements to a photo.

ejrmaine Loc: South Carolina

Photography is an art form, you as the photographer have a right to express your feelings with an image. If you choose to use HDR and you like it 'garish' that's your choice, who cares what others think.
I happen to like HDR and also like HDR shots that are pushed to a limit. So what, if you don't like it move on.

steveg48

ejrmaine wrote:

Photography is an art form, you as the photographer have a right to express your feelings with an image. If you choose to use HDR and you like it 'garish' that's your choice, who cares what others think.
I happen to like HDR and also like HDR shots that are pushed to a limit. So what, if you don't like it move on.

I agree with this sentiment. I like some HDR that is overdone and also some that is processed to be realistic. I think the photographer is an artist and can and should do what pleases them. Non-HDR images can be 'over-processed' too.

cmc4214 Loc: S.W. Pennsylvania

grandmadeb wrote:

I like some of the HDR that I see, others not so much. I like more realistic captures.

I agree. My taste is toward a natural look. I also believe that HDR, as with any post processing will not be too evident if done well...just my opinion