Lacock Abbey

[Mike Chapman]

Here's an outdoors HDR for you for comparison. Clouds are white, skies are blue, if I can do HDR, so can you.

To me that isn't HDR can you tell me the process you went through to make that into a HDR image? it honestly looks like you have just increased the saturation.

 

[agp]

When you google "hdr", this is the first thing you get - THIS isn't HDR. This is garbage. You said that my photo, to you, isn't HDR. If the photo below to you is HDR then I don't know how to help.

HDR is about creating a natural image with lighting similar to how the human eye sees (which has more range than what a sensor "see"). The original image had a very bright sky, and dark houses. You shouldn't be able to "see" an HDR - an HDR image is supposed to look real and natural.

 

[Braineack]

There's High Dynamic Range in AGP's photo. The goal of HDR is to make images appear like you'd see them with the human eye--since your camera cannot caputre scenes in the way your eye does. In AGP's shot we have a rich blue skies and then a scene that's not underexposed (although I think there could be a little more shadow recovery). When looking at that scene in real life, im sure your eye would see the blue sky as well as the shadowed detail under the pier.

In your first shot you've reduced the dynamic range. You've clipped blacks significantly and there are no whites in the image. The scene does not appear as your eye would see it. It looks dull, gray, and lackluster. Regardless of whatever process you applied to your shots, they are are NOT HDR. The dynamic range has been reduced from the orginal capture, not increased.

You may be confusing HDR for tone-mapping where you exaggerate an HDR methodology to make scenes look unrealistic and cartoonish. Tone-mapping also decreases HDR in order to impress people on the internet.

 

[Mike Chapman]

If the photo below to you is HDR then I don't know how to help.

Maybe answering the original question might help!

what processing did you use to produce that image? how many shots did you take-what software did you use?

 

[Braineack]

why does that even matter?

 

[agp]

If the photo below to you is HDR then I don't know how to help.

Maybe answering the original question might help!

what processing did you use to produce that image? how many shots did you take-what software did you use?

The underlined question is not something that can be easily answered... if I can write that in a post, the world would not have any more ugly HDRs like the ones you find on Google images.

I took three shots at +1, 0, and -1 exposure, and I used Lightroom and Photoshop.

One simple advice I would give though is to give up Photomatix, if you are using that.