HDR: this is my first run at HDR. Not too sure about it? whatathink?

the chuckster Loc: Ironton, Ohio

this is my first run at HDR. Not too sure about it? whatathink?

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

IS the effect what you wanted? Are you happy? Interesting shots, might or might not have been my treatment but I was not there so I don't know what you were working from or to., and I con't know what AI would have tried to present.

cabunit Loc: SE Connecticut

Agree with Bob above. The first question is always "do YOU like it?"

Having said that, I see lots of elements in the top photo that look artificial, such as the halo-ing (light areas) around the signal bridge and between the horizontal and vertical elements in its grid work. The main column of the structure is light at the bottom and dark against the sky. The highlights on the tops of the rails seem to bleed onto the surrounding ties and roadbed. That's for starters (and PLEASE from now on consider staying off RR property, which can get you arrested or, if you're not familiar with operations, injured or worse). Not knowing your process, it's hard to recommend changes, but then again, you may like the effects as they are.

As for the bottom photo, the first thing I notice is that gray area in the sky at the top. Too much highlight compensation, perhaps?

Many at UHH feel that if it's obviously HDR, meaning artificial looking or unrealistic, someone has gone too far. And not every scene lends itself to HDR. But that's for you to decide. Have fun experimenting.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

(edit - cabunit wrote similar while I was typing; I'm just gonna leave mine as-is

)

As a viewer with no personal connection to the scenes:

#1 has odd result within the light structures and abrupt color changes, both in the sky and in the vertical section of the metal structure.

#2 is unappealing gray in the area of the sky that would more naturally look white.

There is an HDR section on UHH, though it's not very active:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-107-1.html

And a Post Processing section:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-116-1.html

You might try posting your originals with your results and ask for assistance in any area that you're unhappy with.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

the chuckster wrote:

this is my first run at HDR. Not too sure about it? whatathink?

I have found that railroad subjects can benefit as much or more than any others from HDR treatment. There are a lot of overhanging structures and parts that cause much that is of interest to be in shadow. That said, in my experience, the 'overexposed' images are much more valuable and helpful than the underexposed ones, which can generate halos and other artifacts. These can be problematic if you are looking for a pictorial final image. Adding shadow detail can really make an improvement, though.

You will have to decide whether HDRpp provides you with benefits versus just flattening your curves. I don't do nearly as much HDR now that most of my shooting is in raw.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

the chuckster wrote:

this is my first run at HDR. Not too sure about it? whatathink?

Dial it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back, you can tell from the excessive haloing around the signal frame in #1 and the colors in #2. But, don't feel bad, we all do it the first time with HDR processing software. I find the effects are much more manageable if the filter is in its own layer and that you can adjust opacity to get a good blend of the before and after.

wham121736 Loc: Long Island, New York

I agree with all the above advice, and have benefited greatly by doing what rgrenaderphoto said: Perform HDR on a second layer and dial down the opacity to the minimum required for the desired effect.

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Dial it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back, you can tell from the excessive haloing around the signal frame in #1 and the colors in #2. But, don't feel bad, we all do it the first time with HDR processing software. I find the effects are much more manageable if the filter is in its own layer and that you can adjust opacity to get a good blend of the before and after.

19photo30 Loc: Olympia, WA

What is HDR? And why is it necessary to use such abbreviations? Not all of us are so sophisticated.

CO

I've had this HDR guide for some time. They have some sample pages online. This page is one of the pages they put online. Your photo #1 suffers from the dirty whites shown in the example. In photo #2, the white clouds are blown out and void of detail. They are also suffering from dirty whites.

(Download)

Largobob

19photo30 wrote:

What is HDR? And why is it necessary to use such abbreviations? Not all of us are so sophisticated.

Oh, wait.... what is photography... Why should anyone post an image or technique that a particular member may not understand? Sorry...19photo30, you need to come up to speed.

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

19photo30 wrote:

What is HDR? And why is it necessary to use such abbreviations? Not all of us are so sophisticated.

As far as what it is - Google it . . .

As far as why the abbreviations - do you refer to this country as the United States of America or the shorter versions - USA or US?

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

19photo30 wrote:

What is HDR? And why is it necessary to use such abbreviations? Not all of us are so sophisticated.

I simply typed "HDR" into Google search and it returned 250 million results in less than a second. How long did it take you to type your complaint?

wham121736 Loc: Long Island, New York

CO wrote:

I've had this HDR guide for some time. They have some sample pages online. This page is one of the pages they put online. Your photo #1 suffers from the dirty whites shown in the example. In photo #2, the white clouds are blown out and void of detail. They are also suffering from dirty whites.

Can you give us a link to this documents?

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

the chuckster wrote:

this is my first run at HDR. Not too sure about it? whatathink?

Well, you may not have used a wide enough difference between exposing for shadows and exposing for highlights - your highlight areas are still overexposed, and the software you used put in a grey tone, resulting in severely veiled highlights in both images.

The HDR "effect" was too heavily applied, resulting in severe halos.

It also looks like you used camera produced jpegs, rather than raw or 16 bit files converted from raw - the harsh transition in the railroad track sky, from color to grey, is a possible artifact of reduced bit depth and banding. This may not happen if using 16 bit files, and probably wouldn't happen if using raw captures as your starting point.

You have some interesting subjects and nice compositions, and given the right treatment, these could be stunningly beautiful. My critique is intended to help you refine your approach and workflow. I hope you keep at it and you post more work. The hardest part - selecting good subject matter and composition - seems to be under control.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

HDR? simply a tool... like a surgeon's for scalpel...

Sadly some are more concerned about the tool than the technique...

Obsidian is used by some surgeons for scalpel blades, as well-crafted obsidian blades have a cutting edge many times sharper than high-quality steel surgical scalpels, the cutting edge of the blade being only about 3 nanometers thick...

That said, is it the obsidian blade? or the surgeon's technique that is germane to the outcome...
a.k.a. is H.D.R. really an answer or simply another solution to the same issue...

All the best on your journey...