HDR as an art and not an enhancement

liltimmy1313 · Aug 3, 2009

There had been some upset over HDR's purpose. Maybe it's ballsy, maybe it's not but I am going to put up an extremely tonemapped, over-the-top, vibrant HDR. I just want to see what people think of this style because I find it rather stunning even though it's not realistic. Sometimes photo's don't have to realistic. But that's just the surrealistic speaking...

Enjoy, Tell me what you think of this sorta style and the picture in general.

Handheld, at something like 1/200, f/8 ??

I don't really remember. I know I was at 20mm, though.

Russ-O-Vision, HOORAH by ~liltimmy1313 on deviantART <--original link

KmH · Aug 3, 2009

To me it looks like 2 images mashed together. The colors of the building are plausable but not the sky.

The composition works.

liltimmy1313 · Aug 3, 2009

I like the illogical surreal sky and believe it or not that is the real sky.

So you're saying the sky doesn't work here?

manaheim · Aug 3, 2009

It's a really good example of some of the extreme results you can get, which is certainly interesting.

Josh66 · Aug 3, 2009

liltimmy1313 said:
Enjoy, Tell me what you think of this sorta style and the picture in general.

Every style has it's place.

I think this picture, specifically, would look really cool with an ominous looking sky... The bright, vibrant, colors of the building contrasting with a dark, ominous, and threatening sky. ...Just an idea. Not sure if it would work, but it would be interesting to see.

Dao · Aug 4, 2009

Sometimes, things need to cross the line. In this example, I will not consider it is a photo of a building/structure. I will consider it is a Artwork. And an artwork do not need to be realistic.

And personally I do not consider it is a High Dynamic Range, although at one point of time it was until converted into a LDR. But it does not really matter how it is called. As long as the end result is something that people like to see.

c.cloudwalker · Aug 4, 2009

"HDR as an art and not an enhancement"

Absolutely. Why not? In art, anything goes. The technical aspects are secondary to the finished product. In this case, an image.

And in this case the image does not do anything for me. The building is absolutely beautiful but that in itself does not make an interesting photo. The sky is so weird it doesn't look real, even though you say it is, and it doesn't please my eye.

So, yes, I agree that HDR even pushed to the extreme, just like any other special effect, has its place but I don't think this is the best example.

Sachphotography · Aug 10, 2009

Art is in the eye of the beholder. A person buys a piece of art for what it does for them.
Thats why I am not buying this picture.

There is a person out there for everything which is why I cant stress enough for people to find their own unique style. Go find yours and stick to it no matter what people say.
I do not shoot HDR because it does not fit my style. However, for some it enhances their style. For others...... it destroys it..... You just seem like you have not found your style yet......................

Dominantly · Aug 11, 2009

c.cloudwalker said:
"HDR as an art and not an enhancement"

Absolutely. Why not? In art, anything goes. The technical aspects are secondary to the finished product. In this case, an image.

And in this case the image does not do anything for me. The building is absolutely beautiful but that in itself does not make an interesting photo. The sky is so weird it doesn't look real, even though you say it is, and it doesn't please my eye.

So, yes, I agree that HDR even pushed to the extreme, just like any other special effect, has its place but I don't think this is the best example.

Well said.

snowsoftJ4C · Aug 30, 2009

I personally LOVE this photo. I feel HDR should go both ways!
HDR as an art is overused, true, but the great ones still have that magic. If you need more shadow detail, HDR it up, but tone down the settings.