A few of my HDR's

Newfoundland Photos · Oct 17, 2010

I have been doing a bit of HDR Eediting lately tell me what you think.

Bynx · Oct 17, 2010

The only suggestion I can give here is to look around the pic and if you see any colors that are too strong to desaturate the photo slightly so that color doesnt stand out like a sore thumb. The red splashes midway up on the right side are glowing. The sky is too saturated with blue. So backing the whole pic of with saturation a little bit will help a lot. I like the processing you have done. But then Im one of those guys who like it when the pic looks like a piece of artwork instead of a regular photo. Oh, you might want to crop out that wheel sticking into the picture from the left.

dcmoody23 · Oct 17, 2010

Your big picture of the boy on the bike - Is that a single exposure? Or did you put the kid on the bike in the picture through a photo editor?

I'm just not all that interested in this kind of HDR, but I mean nice stuff. I don't have much to say, given that this isn't my type of photography.

peacock · Oct 18, 2010

He probably used a RAW and extracted different exposures from it to produce an HDR.

dcmoody23 · Oct 18, 2010

Exactly - and that's not HDR.. It's garbage, haha. Just kidding, but I don't like that. just doesn't seem right.
I always take at least 5 exposures, and then ditch the ones I don't need or use the all.

Bynx · Oct 18, 2010

dcmoody23 said:
Exactly - and that's not HDR.. It's garbage, haha. Just kidding, but I don't like that. just doesn't seem right.
I always take at least 5 exposures, and then ditch the ones I don't need or use the all.

Youre a regular little potty mouth. Please name the people who are forcing you to look at HDR. We can make them stop.

dcmoody23 · Oct 18, 2010

Bynx said:
Youre a regular little potty mouth. Please name the people who are forcing you to look at HDR. We can make them stop.

What? I was just kidding .. I just don't like hdr that isn't really hdr.. As in taking one exposure and making 5 out of it... and I really don't understand the potty mouth thing.
I just have a very realistic taste... The art preset with dark outlines doesn't do anything for me.. And going more extreme does even less. But I always make a point to say that it's not my personal taste, and only post when I'm interested to know.

dcmoody23 · Oct 18, 2010

Tone mapping a single exposure and using grunge preset (on photomatix) ... Not my style.

Was I out of line to say that single exposure into HDR is garbage? Admittedly, absolutely. It was just a joke, poor pathetic, yes. It's late, I'm hopped up on coffee, and I haven't slept. Having said that, I know that's not an excuse and that's why I am apologizing to the OP instead of just erasing my previous post...

Maybe I'm anti-single exposure HDR because I've been taking 5 shots all along and formatting them alllll. haha, no. not really, but interesting and creative. And for your target audience you hit the nail on the head. Bikers are creative, and they probably can enjoy that. I'm a different kind of creative, and use HDR for the purpose of getting the right exposure throughout my picture 90% of the time. Maybe it's just time I explored HDR deeper as well.
It's poor, but it's creative and interesting (hopefully) - this is a single exposure.

Bynx · Oct 18, 2010

Tone mapping a single image is not HDR at all. Its just a digitally manipulated image. Its just that tone mapping allows an HDR to be seen on our present day equipment. And the way people can screw up an HDR with tone mapping I can agree with what you say. But I wouldnt say the OP here has created garbage. It was slightly oversaturated, and thats all. I think after I desaturated it enough the image looks very realistic in fact. I dont understand the term quasi HDR when a couple of different exposures are taken from a raw file. Doesnt a raw file contain more info than is needed to view. So by making a couple of exposures from it that the DR can be increased beyond either of the exposures? By the way, my HDR images are always realistic. But I do enjoy looking at a Dave Hill type of process.

dcmoody23 · Oct 18, 2010

I shoot my HDR in jpeg. I know it's a sin, but I hate loading bracketed photos to photomatix and before you get to do anything with them they convert all of them.. And IMO photomatix gives you enough control over the tonemapped version to not need to get into a raw editor. If I was selling my stuff for millions I'd shoot in raw, but with only 6 gigs of memory (a 4gb card and a 2gb card) I can't afford to shoot raw on an entire day trip .

Bynx · Oct 18, 2010

I have a little Fuiji S700 point and shoot which is my main camera and doesnt shoot Raw, only jpeg. I have a Nikon D1X which shoots Raw but I prefer my Fuji. The only thing is, if shooting action scenes with moving people, cars or vegetation a single Raw file can produce a really nice image with no ghosting. So thats when I use my Nikon.

tal_polano · Oct 19, 2010

so shooting in one RAW file and making different exposures out of it isn't a HDR? most of my friends shoot in single RAW, and processed in photomatix. what crime could they've done with it? :grumpy:

ann · Oct 19, 2010

no it isn't hdr. HDR is used WHEN the contrast range is longer than the sensor can record.

Yes, one can take one file and turn it into a variety of exposures and then put it in photomatiz, etc. and then tonemapp the results, but it isn't HDR.

Don't understand, What crime could they've done with it comment.

Are you saying who cares? Understanding and using the correct technique is part of being an advanced photographer .

dcmoody23 · Oct 19, 2010

ann said:
no it isn't hdr. HDR is used WHEN the contrast range is longer than the sensor can record.

Yes, one can take one file and turn it into a variety of exposures and then put it in photomatiz, etc. and then tonemapp the results, but it isn't HDR.

Don't understand, What crime could they've done with it comment.

Are you saying who cares? Understanding and using the correct technique is part of being an advanced photographer .

I would love to see a comparison between taking one correctly exposed image, making copies in different exposures, and tone mapping it, vs. the same exact image, shot on scene with 5 different exposures, and then tone map it.
I'd be willing to bet that the real HDR would have better, richer color with a better contrast.

I might have to try that tonight and post it, but take it with a grain of salt, because i'll probably forget

Bynx · Oct 19, 2010

Considering a good HDR to be a realistic looking image with a high dynamic range beyond that of any single image making up the HDR, then perhaps it might be a good idea that when an HDR image is posted it is accompanied by the middle 'best shot' so we can see what improvement over the middle shot has been made. Also if a middle shot cant be posted because there is none then its not an HDR but just a tone mapped image and should be posted elsewhere in a Digital Alteration forum.