The idea of an HDR is to give more dynamic range than would be possible with a normal exposure. The human eye can see something along the lines of "21 stops" of light, whereas a camera can only see around 7 in any single exposure. HDR helps that and gives you an image closer to what your eye would see. That being said, there are many cases where an HDR is unecessary because the camera sees enough or nearly enough of the scene to be able to give you a solid representation without the HDR funkiness. An example would be a reasonably evenly lit scene. Now can you do an HDR anyway? Well, sure, I guess... but most of the time you spend a lot of effort and either wind up with something that looks bizarro, or frankly just kinda silly. If you like it, you like it... whatever works for you. I'm just suggesting that folks stop and think carefully about what it is they are trying to do and why. Are you... - Trying to get critical detail that would otherwise be lost? or... - Trying to make a really WILD surreal shot of some kind? or... - Trying to make an interesting photo out of what would otherwise be kinda a crappy one? (or maybe something else) Whatever it is, know about it before you take the shot and start HDRing your buns off. The results will likely be far better. For me, I am almost always doing the first one. I get shots like this from that... Not over the top, not wonky... just more detail in shadow and highlight.