It seems that the way to take a good photo these days is to take 700 exposures, never mind the composition or other factors because the end result is guaranteed to be good, pile them up in your favourite image editing application, play around with the sliders to get a ridiculous cartoony/artificial look, bang on a load of vingetting and export. Are single exposures in decline? I have nothing against dabbling with a little HDR, but I notice now there are some photographers who use it exclusively, as opposed to single exposures. It seems that due to the cool effect they give, anyone with a bit of Photoshop knowledge can be a great photographer. I acknowledge that it does take skill to find a HDR suitable subject and there is a difference between a good and a bad HDR, but there is no doubt that it is easier to make a photo look good with HDR than a single exposure, due to the cool effect it gives, which is why I respect the work of photographers such as landscaper David Noton, who uses his trusty ND grad's to get most of the effects he wants. Is HDR overused and how do you respect "HDR-only" photographers in relation to "normal" ones?