Does anyone here not like HDR?...

[Locut0s]

Absolutely no offence intended to anyone who is entering this months photo contest nor anyone else who has posted HDR photos. Many of your shots are very nice and this is a personal preference thing, not a critique of anyone's work.

I personally don't mind HDR photos if they are very subtle. When I say subtle I mean so subtle that you wouldn't know they are HDR. To me HDR should be used to bring out detail in photos that are hard or otherwise impossible to capture, where the dynamic range is so wide that no setting can possible capture what the eye can see. In fact I want to get into this end of HDR photography. Here is an example of one that I don't mind so much, though even here I think it's a bit over done in the rubble at the bottom:



Instead however HDR is often used for a different artistic effect. When the HDR settings are truned way up you get a sort of painterly effect or a photoshop filter effect. These shots are more along the lines of this fad:







These types of images have a halo effect going on, everything is super saturated and painterly like. It reminds me of a few photoshop filter type effects.

Again this is all personal preference, please don't take offence. But I rather dislike this last type of HDR that seems to be so popular nowadays, anyone else?

[X_Digger]

1. Yeah, it's a tad too hipster in application, for the most part.

I've seen some *really* well done shots, and some.. well.. you gave good examples.

[rdking647]

2. i like the second effect

but then ive always been a little strange

[bluedigger]

3. It just depends on the image.

I don't have anything against the process, per se. Of the examples you posted, I like the third the least, and the last the most.

[Stevenmarc]

5. I really

Dislike the third one on so many levels and speaking of level, they could have taken a second to straighten out the shot while they were overcooking it.

[bluedigger]

6. That's a big pet peeve of mine.

Considering you are using a tripod (in theory) there's just no excuse. I have a FB friend who keeps posting pics with the ocean sloping... Level that shit out!

[groundloop]

8. It looks more like perspective 'distortion' than unlevel

Vertical lines from the building slope upward to the left on the right side of the photo, and upward to the right on the left side of the photo. It was probably taken from relatively close (I'm guessing that it would be impossible to photograph that building from far enough away to eliminate this).

As far as HDR photos, some I like and some I don't, it just depends on the particular image. What I really don't like are the shots where there's that halo around the intersection where the images were blended. I assume that's from relatively unsophisticated software with no cleanup afterwards.

[Stevenmarc]

9. The picture

Really only required a simple 1.7 degree adjustment to straighten the whole thing out after I did a little test on the image. Furthermore if there is any type of perspective distortion it would appear to be telephoto compression, the building is easily a football field away from the camera if you look at the people in relation to the scene and that the path opens up into a courtyard which is seriously compressed, distance doesn't appear to be the issue for its cattywonkiness.

I'm not so fast to blame the software's unsophistication in this case considering the other issues with the shot, there's a whole lot of user error.

[groundloop]

10. Oh hell, we're not even talking about the same image..... NEVER MIND

For some reason the wonderful internet connection where I work blocks certain image hosting sites. I pulled up this thread on a public wi-fi network and see the one you're talking about now and agree with everything that's been said about it.

[Stevenmarc]

11. LOL

I hate when that happens. And now I see what you're talking about, now if they had a tilt-shift lens.

[Stevenmarc]

4. It's one tool in the toolbag

And I never use it as a final result but as a part of my workflow when it's necessary.

[Sherman A1]

7. Haven't tried it yet,

And in no hurry to do so. It really does nothing for me, I guess I am too much amateur or too lazy, but I will skip it for now.

[ramapo]

12. The more I learn...

The more I like it.

Prior to this month's contest, I felt HDR was just a special, somewhat annoying, effect. Now I see that it can be very subtle and that it can be a great help under difficult lighting conditions. And sometimes the more intense effects are appropriate. Of course this is all dependent on the image and personal preference.

I've only been playing with HDR for a week or so and have found it offers a lot of choice. I am in awe of the variety of images submitted thus far in this month's contest. They range from the subtle to the intense and I like them all.

My biggest problem, besides getting the basic technical steps down, is working through the almost endless options offered by the software. I've found it difficult to decide what, and how much, of an effect I like.

I just got my new D5200 with auto-bracketing, replacing my somewhat water-logged D3100, so that should make the shooting part a tad more efficient. And I just saw that my new iPhone 5, replacing my somewhat water-logged iPhone4, has an HDR setting. So I guess it is going mainstream.

[JohnnyRingo]

13. I really like the bridge.

No matter how it was edited, I think it was done to great effect and made a great photo absolutely outstanding.

No offense.

[Blue_In_AK]

14. I agree with you.

I am really, really unfond of that over processed look. Like you, I think a little bit is fine, but so much of what you see today is over the top.

[Stevenmarc]

15. Whenever I see overcooked HDR

All I can think of is the line in Spinal Tap:

"The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven"

[sir pball]

16. It CAN be very good, but usually isn't.

When I first saw it probably six or seven years ago I was blown away; back then you had to do it painstakingly by hand, layering, masking and blending four or 5 images to get just the look you wanted. I think that contributed to the quality of the early images - the process was so complicated and skillful that it weeded out most of the snapshooters. Now that you can just turn a setting on in your camera or play with a few popup menus in Photoshop, the average quality has gone down quite a bit. Not that there isn't still a lot of good HDR stuff out there, but the noise floor has been raised so dramatically the signal is getting almost impossible to find IMO.

[Stevenmarc]

17. I'm still old school

on that one to some degree. My final HDR output is never my final product but it does become a layer that I work with to get the final product. However, I do have to say that the current software, especially NIK is a great time saver from the good old days.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

18. don't understand really what is meant by HDR

and yes I do know what the acronym means. What I'm trying to say is it just seems like photos that have been edited to amplify saturation or add color that wasn't there in the first place.

[Stevenmarc]

19. Not exactly true

HDR when used correctly can get the image your camera has the ability to capture much closer to what your eye can actually perceive but a lot of people take it to an extreme.

A good article about Eye vs. Camera

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/cameras-vs-human-eye.htm

[postatomic]

20. It's just another tool used in Digital Photography

Same as a Painter that uses a different type of brush. I can understand why HDR is popular with some. In this day and age of fully automatic photography (shoot everything and anything) it's hard to come up with anything that hasn't been done a bazillion times.

I use it as a tool. There are times when I take a pic with the idea of using HDR to process it. I don't love it or hate it. It is what it is. During the last photography boom of the 40's there were many alternative developing processes that caused many traditional photographers to grab their pitchforks and torches. I'm sure there were even a few that thought Ansel Adams "cooked" his photos.