SO this HDR is really neat but

[D80MAN]

I love the possibilties but what are it's restrictions per say; lo light pictures .. because i love shooting landscapes and would love to master HDR and I've seen a lot of daylight and sunset pictures but I also like shooting skylines and such so I just need to know the limitations.

 

[Alex_B]

low light is not really a restriction here... for HDR you will be shooting with a tripod anyway, so longer exposures are no problem. I have seen night-HDRs of cityscapes.

 

[PatriK-b]

I would say moving objects is the limitation as you will need to take several shoots of the scene.

 

[Remi M.]

Having done my share of HDR shots I can say that you should be carefull where you use it. A large percentage of the time a HDR shot will make the scene look worse then a properly exposed and processed non-HDR shot. HDR adds noise. I found the best application for it is for scene where a single shot can't show the dynamic range from bright to dark. So where a portion of the image is very bright and another dark.

 

[ann]

go check danburkholders' website for his series about Katrina

 

[D80MAN]

A large percentage of the time a HDR shot will make the scene look worse then a properly exposed and processed non-HDR shot. HDR adds noise.

I agree, i've tinkered with it and some things like colors stand out but so does the noise

 

[Iron Flatline]

go check danburkholders' website for his series about Katrina

Link?

 

[Iron Flatline]

LOL, ok, never mind, I found it. There's actually a person called "Dan Burkholder" - sorry, I'm still very old-school, which means that I need punctuation, separation, and capitalization to aide in reading comprehension.

Anyhoo, Burkholder's Katrina Series is not my thing. This is entirely subjective, and just a matter of taste. I see a lot of HDR like this, a lot of people like it, and his version is particularly extreme.

I've also seen HDR that doesn't render images completely surrealistic, but rather maintains the appearance of straight photography, albeit with a greater dynamic range.

But as I wrote, it's purely a matter of personal taste, there's no right or wrong on that issue.

 

[StudioCMC]

Wow, that is a bit extreme! LOL

Chris

 

[ann]

sorry, i wasn't clearer about the name.

 

[usayit]

From a pure visual aspect the Katrina photos are pretty nice... very surreal.

From a journalistic aspect the photos loose almost all their power. The viewer seems lost in the surrealistic presentation and does not get a sense that this tragic event really destroyed many people's lives.

I've just started to do some quick reading up on HDR in the internet and I have yet to make up my mind. Either way, I'm sure I'll at least dabble a little bit with it. Definitely would like to see the wider dynamic range in a photo presented in a less surrealistic manner. I like to experiment....

 

[ann]

just an fyi, some of Dan's photos are a blending of 8-14 images, sometimes one exposure lasting at least 30 minutes, with a write time of 32 minutes.

just an intereting viewpoint , which some people love or others hate. Doesn't seem any inbetween feelings, but isn't that what we hope to achieve with images; an emotional response?

 

[JIP]

So just to add on here any have any books or site for good how-tos on HDR?

 

[Mr_Bester]

Check out HDRlabs.com for a book(upcoming)/free software and some (at least minor) explanation...
Dug

 

[keith204]

what's HDR?