HDR Shootout #30

[mistermonday]

Yes, I see the sky is a bit ghosted around the edges. It was not as noticeable in the high res image. I will take care to try different zoom views next time.
Thanks & reagrds, Murray

 

[McNugget801]

perfect example of an image that does not need HDR treatment

 

[pathoulihan1]

Perhaps not, but it's certainly interesting to see how so many people can achieve different results using the same or similar means. Certainly a perfect example of how everybody has their own eye and their own taste. Wouldn't you agree? The image may have been fine as one exposure, but it serves well as this shootout exercise.

 

[480sparky]

perfect example of an image that does not need HDR treatment

So your result from the EV0 frame would be............?

 

[McNugget801]

perfect example of an image that does not need HDR treatment

So your result from the EV0 frame would be............?

Not anything worth posting.. just like all the others in this thread.

I tend to lead towards this formula "****ty photo + HDR = ****ty HDR photo". HDR cant turn **** into the gold, do you agree? No point in expanding the dynamic range on something that does not have it to begin with.... right?

I feel this is the reason HDR is frowned upon by most photogs. No offence intended... just being honest.
If you really want some examples of my HDR work I can provide some for you.

 

[480sparky]

perfect example of an image that does not need HDR treatment

So your result from the EV0 frame would be............?

Not anything worth posting.. just like all the others in this thread.

I tend to lead towards this formula "****ty photo + HDR = ****ty HDR photo". HDR cant turn **** into the gold, do you agree? No point in expanding the dynamic range on something that does not have it to begin with.... right?

I feel this is the reason HDR is frowned upon by most photogs. No offence intended... just being honest.
If you really want some examples of my HDR work I can provide some for you.

What kind of set-up do you have that magically corrects pure white and the near-black in the EV0 frame?

I see both 10:6:3 and 255:255:255 in it. If that's not a candidate for HDR, perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us peons who shoot **** what would be.

 

[McNugget801]

What kind of set-up do you have that magically corrects pure white and the near-black in the EV0 frame?
I see both 10:6:3 and 255:255:255 in it. If that's not a candidate for HDR, perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us peons who shoot **** what would be.

No need to get all huffy, your shot just not my cup of tea and just like you I'm entitled to my own opinion. If I was to shoot this bridge first thing I would do is avoid shooting in midday in supper harsh light.

 

[480sparky]

No need to get all huffy, your shot just not my cup of tea and just like you I'm entitled to my own opinion. If I was to shoot this bridge first thing I would do is avoid shooting in midday in supper harsh light.

I apologize for the conditions I had to shoot in. I was there at that moment, and I didn't have all the time in the world to dilly-dally around and wait for 'perfect' conditions. I'm exceedingly sorry for not living in a perfect world.

 

[McNugget801]

I apologize for the conditions I had to shoot in. I was there at that moment, and I didn't have all the time in the world to dilly-dally around and wait for 'perfect' conditions. I'm exceedingly sorry for not living in a perfect world.

No need to feel sorry for yourself. I have hit some location dozens of times over a few years and still have yet to capture the image I have in my head. The point I was making is that HDR should not be a crutch and your last post states that this is manner in which you are using HDR in this image.

 

[480sparky]

No need to feel sorry for yourself. I have hit some location dozens of times over a few years and still have yet to capture the image I have in my head. The point I was making is that HDR should not be a crutch and your last post states that this is manner in which you are using HDR in this image.

I guess you're totally missing the idea of the Shootouts. It's to improve HDR processing, to compare various and different techniques and allow those not familiar with the process to learn more about it........ not belittle others for their lack of skills. Perhaps you could offer something more than "I would return at a different time of day and end up with an award-winning capture" instead of telling everyone who has participated that they do **** work.

 

[mistermonday]

What kind of set-up do you have that magically corrects pure white and the near-black in the EV0 frame?
I see both 10:6:3 and 255:255:255 in it. If that's not a candidate for HDR, perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us peons who shoot **** what would be.

No need to get all huffy, your shot just not my cup of tea and just like you I'm entitled to my own opinion. If I was to shoot this bridge first thing I would do is avoid shooting in midday in supper harsh light.

In addition to having some blown highlights and plugged shadows, the ev0 shot has some "out-of-gamut" colors particularly in the grass. The other shots in the bracketed set compensate for what could not be captured in the single ev0. That makes it a very good candidate for HDR processing. Very often the light is what it is and mother nature gets to call the shots - not the photographer. From a technical perspective, HDR processing and tonemapping the above image will accomplish the intent of improving the dynamic range. As for S###y, you may not like the scene content or composition, but that is a totally different discussion. Many people process HDR images and unfortunately the image itself is uninteresting or has numerous flaws so that HDRifying them doesn't help or makes matters worse. But that is also another discussion. Perhaps you have missed the point of the Shootout, or perhaps I have? BTW, I used different HDR programs on this image and achieved very different results, further accentuating the differences in how the different software functions. From that perspective alone it was a valuable exercise.
Regards, Murray

 

[McNugget801]

I guess you're totally missing the idea of the Shootouts. It's to improve HDR processing, to compare various and different techniques and allow those not familiar with the process to learn more about it........ not belittle others for their lack of skills.

Or maybe you're the one missing it....HDR should not be used as a crutch to make a sub par image better.

If anything it should be used to make a great image even better!

 

[Bynx]

perfect example of an image that does not need HDR treatment

What an asinine statement, and exactly the opposite to what is true. Its a good example of why HDR treatment helps improve the visual impact of an image. I appreciate what you said is your opinion, and what Im saying is my opinion. Also those who contribute their images for the Shootouts arent likely to submit their best images, just ones that will have some impact with HDR treatment. If anything this shootout shows the difference between treatment of the same image, good difference and bad difference.

 

[480sparky]

[Or maybe you're the one missing it....HDR should not be used as a crutch to make a sub par image better.

If anything it should be used to make a great image even better!

I will state it again for your benefit, so please pay attention as I won't repeat it again:

The Shootouts are to improve member's HDR processing, to compare various and different techniques and allow those not familiar with the process to learn more about it. It is NOT about the artistic or compositional merits of the image itself.

Is this such a difficult concept to understand?

 

[McNugget801]

[It is NOT about the artistic or compositional merits of the image itself.

errrrr ... really?
Hence the problem

Fact: ****ty photo + HDR = ****ty HDR photo