First HDRs - I am disappointed - please C&C

[UUilliam]

HDR isn't all THAT difficult, this is my first HDR attempt...

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff300/uuilliam/CHICAGOAMERICA.jpg
(not my photograph btw, i got it from a HDR tutorial on photoshop cafe i think... cant mind where i got it tbh.)

that was 3 exposures btw

 

[samal]

well, looking back at the #2 - I have to agree - not the best HDR candidate, may be it will be a better B&W conversion candidate?

I know, it has halo around the roof and other blemishes, it was literally 30 seconds hack in lightroom, will need to do a proper conversion and gradient exposure filter later

 

[Battou]

actually, no , I was not trying to get them to look unnatural like some HDRs - I just expected more details in skies, and in shadows, but didn't get that - obviously, I missed something important. the tower does look oversaturated to me now as well, I need to try to fix it.

and I did use the lowest ISO - 100, f/11 and was at 35mm - mid range for my 18-50, so it should be as good as my lens can do

What you missed is that additional detail was not there when you shot them, you can't make a storm cloud out of cotton balls. Additionally...The sky does not stop moving...or well we are moving unter the sky constantly, So by default you are loosing detail in the sky because it moved ever so slightly from one shot to the next during all three shots.


Here in lies your dissapointment, the secons shot is not an HDR scene thus not requiring HDR processing, you had in your mind that there was more range to the shot and there was not.

The first shot however, might have been a suitable subject but I feel this scene needed five shots and not three. I think the three shots simply did not get everything that was there, I could be wrong though.


Can I get the three original shots for the first one and go about running it through some HDR processing of my own?

 

[Baaaark]

Another VERY noobish comment, but sometimes you can get a neat effect using a polarizer lens. Maybe it would give you a look you were looking for?

I think things look more saturated with a polarizer. I may be totally alone, but it seems to emphasize certain things making it look more dyamic.

 

[Misfitlimp]

Sounds difficult.

by high dynamic range they mean capturing high and low tonal ranges using the bracketing on your camera. try downloading photomatix pros software and try it out for funsies! its not as scary as it sounds

 

[UUilliam]

OF TOPIC COMMENT:
Samal i hate your avatar.. i keep almost swatting my screen when i see it

 

[ocular]

well, looking back at the #2 - I have to agree - not the best HDR candidate, may be it will be a better B&W conversion candidate?

I know, it has halo around the roof and other blemishes, it was literally 30 seconds hack in lightroom, will need to do a proper conversion and gradient exposure filter later

Thats cool dude, but only problem with picture now is that the sky is darker then your object, unreal.

A hint for hdr. In most cases hdri really shines in low light or overcast days.

 

[AgentDrex]

Don't be too disappointed. I like both of your photos. Much more impressive attempts at HDR than I have done so far. I'm just scratching my head figuring out what I do wrong every time. Maybe I should keep my day job.