BBBruce77 Loc: Eureka, Montana

Well said and seen from the eye of our imagination. Satisfying that urge towards being creative. Have fun!

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

Wow! Thanks for all that work! The differences may look subtle but (downloaded) they're real.
Actually, I liked Franzis. Nothing else picked up the sunset's reflection off the leaves at the top left.
And still get a little 3D effect that many digital shots lack.

Kaib795 Loc: Maryland, USA

Nice HDR samples. This process is a creative one so, as for me, it's about being able to see what couldn't be seen. So shadow details are there and to appreciate them the shadows are lifted somewhat out of their darkness.

As hpucker99 said, I find that a problem to but with practice my creations come out better with more bracketed shots BUT I choose only three to build from. In some cases only two are used. HDR can be a fantastic tool to capture shadow detail that is unthinkable otherwise. And you can capture moving images in HDR if you choose the moving image as your master (to get rid of all other ghosting in between the other shots). So I bracket five to seven shots and pick the ones that are a better set. The overwhelming factor is highlights, I will not use a shot with blown highlights so I can control the final image edits. That typical glow around tree limbs is a blown highlight, which is not recoverable so it ends up as a white glowing edge.

Attached are some farm pictures, taken while walking my dogo.
1) HDR of sunset with ducks flying by. Yes, moving elements it can be captured! The sky was crazy that day but the cloud effect may be from using more than three shots in the HDR build. Later tests I found that I only needed three shots and got less cloud patterning. When taken I didn't even notice the ducks in the left corner as I turned to talk to my daughter.
2) HDR of a storm. In this set of shots the master shot was the one of the flag waving so you could see it.
3) HDR night shot. So there are limits to your captures but it did pull out detail that was otherwise totally black. Yeah, there are a few spots from junk on my lens that need to be removed in PS. The exposure was in the plus or minus 5 second range. The f stop was 22 (my boo) but usually it's at f8. I assume the longer shots pulled out any junk on my lens.
4) What a sunset normal non-HDR looks like. Very dark shadows that often get grainy when adjusted. The tree detail is gone.

Nikon D7500, 35mm f1.8, tripod and bracketed exposures.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Kaib795 Loc: Maryland, USA

Oh, I remember that we were testing f stops to pull out the star effects on bright lighting. The f stop must be very high to get this neat effect.

gsmith051 Loc: Fairfield Glade, TN

Very interesting comparison. Nicely done Jim.

/George

10MPlayer Loc: California

There is a lot to choose from there. I like NIK HDR Efex 2 best because of the detail in the mid-ground. I guess it depend on what you want out of a photo. The spectacular clouds and sky are what grabs the eye but, for me, having some context makes it more interesting. The added detail in the mid to fore ground is the context I'm talking about.

10MPlayer Loc: California

It's close but you lost some of the haze that you see in the NIK Efex2 version.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Exceptional ⭐ All the difference in the world 💕