Who all is sick of HDR?

[gmarquez]

It is my opinion that those photographers who use HDR as an enhancement to documentary photography should do so in a manner which does not detract from the principle image.

OK, I think I get it.

Artistic photo + Artistic HDR = :thumbup:

Documentary photo (including 'not-so-great' photos of random things with bad composition) + Artistic HDR = :thumbdown:

Documentary photo + restrained use of HDR = :thumbup: if the original photo is 'good', and :thumbdown: if the original photo is 'blah' or 'bad'.

Hmmmm, I can see your point.

 

[Kent Frost]

This is a simple way that I've been considering HDR: Use it as an enhancement tool or a tool to achieve the results you're after. Do NOT use it as a corrective tool. Also, learn how to do it without the ugly halos. ;-)

Oh and Woodsac...thanks for the compliment on the avatar. I had one guy tell me it looked like I was struggling on the toilet.

 

[Torus34]

Try replacing 'HDR' with 'Photoshop' or 'High Key' or 'Selective Focus' or 'Filter' or ...

And the rant goes on.

It began with the first pictures which used a new technique and it will continue with the next new thing.

 

[RMThompson]

Bah. I hate all of this hating. People do what they like... if you don't want to do it, find your niche and move on.

I do a lot of selective color work, and guess what? It's REQUESTED from my clients. Sure you can say that they don't know art, or they just like the effect and it's not about a good photo and blahblahblah... but the simple fact is that some people are going to like it.

Same with HDR, or heavily filtered photos. Some people are going to like and some hate it. I personally like it, even if I am still not convinced that motorcycle pic is real! LOL

HOWEVER I think saying things like "selective color = eww" is rude and confrontational. If you don't like it, you don't like it, you don't need to poke fun at someone elses work constantly in your signature. Great, your not a fan, but if you hate it enough to post it on your signature you have a non-healthy obsession with not liking it!

lol

There are entire boards dedicated to photoshopping existing pictures, hundreds if not thousands of people talking about it, as much as we are talking about taking pictures if not MORE. It's their hobby and for some their job, just like here.... to each his own!

 

[RMThompson]

Oh and because I want to, here is a selective color picture and a terrible attempt at HDR... you know, totally "eww".

 

[Alex_B]

there are so many HDR images floating around where you do not see that they are HDR ... What about those? Anyone sick of them too?


I think a forum has some dynamic to its own... and if someone shos a HDR which intentionally has the plastic HDR look with lots of detail everywhere, then people like it or think it interesting and so they want to try it by themselves in the process of still trying to find their own style. In that way HDR avalanches can be started.
I gues now there is a certain HDR hype going on, which will later settle down to normal levels and will only be applied to situations where it helps the image.

 

[Funky]

Oh and because I want to, here is a selective color picture and a terrible attempt at HDR... you know, totally "eww".

i just think selective coloring died in the 80's, apparently not. :mrgreen:

edit: oh and im like 80% sure that this months photo contest winner was an HDR.

 

[RMThompson]

Well Funky considering selective coloring is a lot easier with newer digital graphical programs, and I was age 1 - 10 in the 80s I really wasn't do much of it then.

Also, on flickr doing a search for selective and color gets you 3,595 results... of course a large part of them I don't consider great, but that's the case with any photograph, wouldn't you say?

Hardly dead.

Oh and for comparison's sake, HDR gets a whopping 155,677 results.

Current fad? Of course!

 

[Funky]

thats true, but i think i already said something about the fact hrd was just as valid as selective coloring, selective coloring is just a step behind. the thing is, hdr is cool. maybe not always but when needed its fairly amazing. even when someone creates a crap hdr its like someone taking a bad photo we on the forums shouldnt have a thread saying were sick of it. if there was a sudden uproar of selective coloring, i wouldnt be posting about the fact i didnt like it, its in my siggy . i guess that was what im trying to get at. its a trend that will probably die off when camera companys make better ccd's, untill then i say let it have its day.

 

[RMThompson]

Funky I don't know. To me much of HDR is more than just capturing a range the human eye can see but the camera's sensor cannot normally... it's about making things a little unlrealistic... give it an edge to make you go "woah". Will larger/better sensors ever give it that edge? Maybe.

In the meantime, I still think your mean for saying selective color = eww. I wonder if it's ever caused someone to NOT post a picture in fear of harsh comments?

I like selective color myself... when used correctly. In the above example, I used it to emphasis the tattoo... and to be perfectly honest I am planning an entire tattoo book using selective color.

Thanks for the add on Flickr and the comment. my pictures are woefully free of comments.

 

[Funky]

the thing is, hdr captures a range greater than the eye. if your in a dark room your eye had to focus between the bright washed out window and the dark inside of the room. so hdr is in a way made to make things look unrealistic, but its not always used that way.

and im not mean, i just feel fairly strongly about selective coloring, i can see its use in a tatoo book, but when you have a kid holding a flower and its selective colorised, i wont like it. and i changed my sig.

 

[Alex_B]

I think one has to differentiate:

- i think HDRI-like-techniques (multiple exposures) can be used to compensate for the limited dynamic range of today's ccd and cmos sensors. Future sensors might not require this anymore. Today good sensors are similar in dynamic range to slide film. In the future they might be more like negative film ... and even better. In that way they might better resemble the capabilities of the human eye/brain combination.

- the other thing people do is create images with a high dynamic range though the whole spectrum, which is different from what our way of seeing, and hence looks "unrealistic / fake". If done carefuly, it can create nice images, almost impressionist like, or painting-like. consider it a form of art. But this can also easily overdone. What one considers overdone and what not is a very personal thing and depends on taste.

 

[RMThompson]

Funky,

I understand that (about HDR)... but you asserted the sensors of the future will do the same. I doubt they will.

As far as selective color... you dont have to change your sig dude, it's all good.

Hate this pics of mine now. mua ha ha

 

[BoblyBill]

I think one has to differentiate:

- i think HDRI-like-techniques (multiple exposures) can be used to compensate for the limited dynamic range of today's ccd and cmos sensors. Future sensors might not require this anymore. Today good sensors are similar in dynamic range to slide film. In the future they might be more like negative film ... and even better. In that way they might better resemble the capabilities of the human eye/brain combination.

- the other thing people do is create images with a high dynamic range though the whole spectrum, which is different from what our way of seeing, and hence looks "unrealistic / fake". If done carefuly, it can create nice images, almost impressionist like, or painting-like. consider it a form of art. But this can also easily overdone. What one considers overdone and what not is a very personal thing and depends on taste.

That's exactly why I use it myself. I want people to see as close to what I saw, and in the world of storm chasing and photographing clouds you almost always either overexpose the sky to get the ground or underexpose the ground to get the sky... Clouds are tricky.

 

[THORHAMMER]

I peronally cant stand 90% of the hdr's that I see, but what woodsac does with them I really like.. its more of an airbrushed alternate reality that he adds to them,
I think its a great tool for the interior real estate industry, but its a little weird of a tool. simulating something like shadows for interiors is never as good as getting it right in camera.

Still, to each his own,... its just a tool...