Tasteful HDR? You be the judge!

[robertwsimpson]

C&C is always welcome
1


2


3

 

[PhotoXopher]

I really like the first two, last one doesn't do much for me.

Second one is my favorite, really brought life to the old shack.

 

[robertwsimpson]

What do you not like about the third one?























(it's not an HDR conversion... I just put tons of compression on the shadows to make sure everyone was paying attention lol)

 

[PhotoXopher]

Sorry, I guess that would help

There's just nothing that captures my attention and I find my eyes wandering aimlessly at the photo, rather flat.

The others have a lot of depth and really draw me in.

 

[robertwsimpson]

cool thanks! I'll remember that when I do this in the future.

 

[andrew99]

Nice work! I like how the colours are rich but not over the top. The 2nd shot is really great.

 

[robertwsimpson]

Thanks!

It's hard to find a balance between oversaturation and the grayness that sliding the gamma up a bit causes. it's fun to try and figure this HDR stuff out though.

 

[Goontz]

I'm not usually a big fan of HDR, mainly because it's usually overdone and/or done to a picture that it shouldn't be. That said, I think these were pretty well done, and I agree with everything PhotoX said.

 

[robertwsimpson]

Thanks! I actually went a little overboard on the first 2 compared to what I usually do just to see how far I could push it. Nice to know that I still have some leeway.


I think the main problem with HDR is that people think of it as an "effect" rather than a tool. I only use it to display more of a dynamic range, and not to look like a drawing or painting.

 

[bigtwinky]

I think you nailed the HDRs that you did. I agree in that many people (and its fine to do, just not my style) like to over process HDRs. I like to consider HDR are a tool to be used when the moment is proper to ensure a nicely captured image or scene.

So for the processing, really nice job.

Overall, #2 stands out as the better image IMO. I like the contrast in colours between the red of the building and the blue of the sky. Its also really clear. The camera angle also helps give the image a nice 3D look, or least some sort of depth.

In contrast, what I like about #2 is totally lacking in #3. The colours all kind of blend together making the shot bland. Its a straight on shot, with next to no depth or interest. All you are missing is perfectly centering the image.

 

[Goontz]

I think the main problem with HDR is that people think of it as an "effect" rather than a tool. I only use it to display more of a dynamic range, and not to look like a drawing or painting.

I agree in that many people (and its fine to do, just not my style) like to over process HDRs. I like to consider HDR are a tool to be used when the moment is proper to ensure a nicely captured image or scene.

:thumbup: My feelings exactly.

 

[Battou]

The images them selves are not doing much for me but the processing looks great IMHO

 

[Vautrin]

I like number 2... Number 1 the sky is very nice but the car isn't so interesting. I think Battou said it well -- the processing to HDR is top notch but the subject matter leaves something to be desired...

Now that sky with a windswept plain, or some nice mountains, that would be very nice...

 

[robertwsimpson]

Actually, to the right crowd, it's a very interesting car... grocery getter that runs the quarter in a 13.3 seconds? Yes please.

regardless, comments on the post was what I was most interested in, so thanks for the compliments!

 

[thoughtcryme]

Great!
I love #2.
I'm intrigued by HDR.
Can you give a quick rundown explaining your process?