My first real go at HDR

[Nikon_Dude]

I like the second shot, but think would be better if the car wasn't in the center of the photo.

 

[R-NAGE Photography]

How many exposures are you using to make your HDR's, and what software are you using to combine the exposures?

It looks like you're not getting enough exposure in the dark portions of the scenes you are shooting, and to much of the highlights.

It was 5 images and I would have to go back and look to see the range.
Should I do more than that?

And photomatrix

 

[lyonsroar]

How many exposures are you using to make your HDR's, and what software are you using to combine the exposures?

It looks like you're not getting enough exposure in the dark portions of the scenes you are shooting, and to much of the highlights.

It was 5 images and I would have to go back and look to see the range.
Should I do more than that?

And photomatrix

You need as many exposures as the dynamic range of the scene calls for. I usually do 3 because that's the limit of my camera's AEB function.

 

[KmH]

How many exposures are you using to make your HDR's, and what software are you using to combine the exposures?

It looks like you're not getting enough exposure in the dark portions of the scenes you are shooting, and to much of the highlights.

It was 5 images and I would have to go back and look to see the range.
Should I do more than that?

And photomatrix

How many, and the range is determined by the scene. To survey the scene you use spot metering and meter various parts of the scene, not just the brightest and darkest.

If most of the scene is dark you may need to bracket -3 EV, -2 EV, -1 EV, 0, +1 EV. The minimum of 3 exposures to do a ture HDR may be enough, but a scene may require 9 or more exposures to image the entire dynamic range.
It isn't always going to be an even spread with 1/2 the exposures above, and half below 0 EV.

The only time I use a camera's AEB feature to make an HDR is when it's pretty windy out.

Most of the time 3 exposures just isn't enough. It's the minimum needed to make a true HDR. The term 'a true HDR' doesn't necessarily mean a good looking HDR.

 

[shmne]

I'm just jumping in real quick, I didn't read anything anyone has said but this is something that just irks me so let me get it out!

HDR photography is great, you get to see many more details than you would have otherwise. This includes the busy sky with all the clouds and their high contrast. Even if they are slightly Oof, it is still distracting from the apparent subject.

I think the HDR was well done in the first image, just may have been better selectively editing the car to increase contrast and definition.

 

[demandread]

The second image feels very dark, almost no detail on the shadowed side of the car or (especially) the wheels and tires. When shooting directly into a light source, you'll want to pull your white point WAY up to compensate, otherwise the whole image will be biased to the dark side.

Like Vader.