My second HDR and my first panoramic

[Philip]

My second HDR and my first panoramic, I didn't had sufficient knowledge about HDR when I took the pictures at different exposures, but anyway, I think it seems like a pretty good result. I used HDR Darkroom.
C&C always welcome.
thanks.

 

[blatty86]

Looks good I honestly like every detail of this pic. Nice work, and where is this by chance?

 

[bailychen]

don't know whether this could be called as a real HDR, because it is more like a single exposure pic from my point. Or you just did not do it that hard.
but anyway, it is a good pic

 

[Bynx]

Very nice job. Id like to see the actual size. How about a portion of it actual size. It would look good hanging on my wall.

 

[Hugo Leung]

I really like how the HDR helped to bring out the details in the houses by evening out the street lamp lighting. Any thoughts about cropping out some of the sky? there isn't much detail there to balance whats in the city.

 

[stevegonsalves]

its beautiful
good work

 

[manaheim]

You don't appear to have a ton of dynamic range in here.

What you DID do was grab a bit more detail than you might have otherwise gotten with that dark of an image, but not a lot.

What you have here is the compound complexities of night time photography and HDR. These are absolutely doable, but really rather nasty if you don't have a really good handle on both.

(forgive me for posting one of my own, please...)

Have a look at this...

HDR? What would you guess?

The answer is no, and yet there is QUITE a lot of detail in there... the reason being the technique of night-time photography. (if you're bored, search on my name and night photography... I've given plenty of tips on here)

Anyway, what I would recommend is go and take the shots again, but this time take them in RAW (you may have anyway) and intentionally overexpose your shots by 2 stops or so. Then back then down in post processing (you'll find you have a ton more detail in them) and THEN do the HDR. Probably produce some really really cool results.

 

[NateS]

You don't appear to have a ton of dynamic range in here.

What you DID do was grab a bit more detail than you might have otherwise gotten with that dark of an image, but not a lot.

What you have here is the compound complexities of night time photography and HDR. These are absolutely doable, but really rather nasty if you don't have a really good handle on both.

(forgive me for posting one of my own, please...)

Have a look at this...

HDR? What would you guess?

The answer is no, and yet there is QUITE a lot of detail in there... the reason being the technique of night-time photography. (if you're bored, search on my name and night photography... I've given plenty of tips on here)

Anyway, what I would recommend is go and take the shots again, but this time take them in RAW (you may have anyway) and intentionally overexpose your shots by 2 stops or so. Then back then down in post processing (you'll find you have a ton more detail in them) and THEN do the HDR. Probably produce some really really cool results.

Wow @ your image.

 

[manaheim]

hahah, thanks Nate.