Can you post the original, I'd like to see what improvements you made using HDR, I cant really tell one way or the other, which is good but a little too subtle to measure if it was worth the effort or not..
Sure Joxby. Here is the whole set of images and the variations of it. The first 3 are the Varying Exposure images and the First one in the second row is the HDR.
Pretty much the HDR image just looks like you have good lighting. Another good use of HDR. I don't like when people use HDR to make the image look fake.
The Graphic Programmes (or Programs) Site here is undergoing a sort of update ... not really an update, but it has never so far been recognised for its also being a GALLERY to show off your heavily pp-ed (ok: "post processed" ) images.
Nothing wrong with doing lots and lots of things to one's images to bring out their most potential or to express better and better (than the SOOC-pic could have done) what the author MEANT to express in the first place.
Only do we feel that this "Graphics (Programme and Photo) Gallery" is the better place for it.
The development to recognise it more for what is actually has always been is fairly new, but said development is in progress, so don't be upset about your HDR-photos being moved from the "regular" galleries into this one. As soon as people know there is yet another place where to find photos, they will go look for them, too, I am sure!
honestly, I dont know, theres nothing wrong with your final edit, HDR or not.
It looks as though it could have been done using ordinary editing tools.
Maybe this type of shot is unlikely to show any huge advantages of using HDR over basic adjustments.
Only one way to find out, try replicate it in photoshop or whatever...
good point Joxby. I did try the normal photo without HDR.. as you can see from the above versions. You can clearly see how the hdr is soft and soothing in texture. Its easy to play around in photoshot to change colors and such.. but its not very neat to play around with the lighting.. i am sure you agree.