Poll- do you like HDR?

[The_Camera_Poser]

I'm really curious what folks think!

[danpass]

If it's not all "freaked out" then, yeah, sure.


I'm a big fan of doing it from ONE raw file.


This way you don't end up with those insane cloud formations, etc ....

.

[sandpiper]

It can be useful, but there are limited subjects / shots that it will improve, rather than simply make an unnatural mess of. There are some stunningly good HDR images around, but for each one there are dozens of poorly done HDRs.

I do use HDR at times, but prefer to blend the different exposures myself on different layers, most often.

[Twisted Image]

every once in a while someone will do one that is absolutely breath taking...
Most of the time it just doesn't work...

[davidcrebelxt]

Like the others, I chose sometimes its ok.

For scenes that need it to balance out lights and darks, its great... and if done right, you don't even realize it.

I even occassionally like the over-processed look. Keyword "occasionally." Maybe sparingly would be a better word. Like any filter, it can be overused. I wouldn't want to see a whole book of them... but one image in one book out of 5 wouldn't be bad.

[Rey]

HDR is quickly becoming an overused gimmick much like PhotoShop lens flares.

That being said, I picked that sometime it's OK. There are instances when HDR photos look spectacular but in as with all thing there is a time and place for it.

[|)\/8]

I agree that people tend to over use this and I have seen many photos where it has been used where it was not needed. I think a lot of people who try to use this technique really don't have a good understanding of when and why it should be used

I have done some HDRs and then processed them to get more of a painting effect. Here are a couple of samples, but I am no expert.

http://www.dykstra.us/images/Maxwell.jpg


http://www.dykstra.us/images/66ChevyHDR.jpg

[BiikeMike]

I dig HDR. I think that if done correctly it can add a lot of depth to an image and make it more visually interesting. That being said, I am still trying to learn how to do it well, and it really is harder than it seems!

[ieatstars]

every once in a while someone will do one that is absolutely breath taking...
Most of the time it just doesn't work...
Spot on.

[Tareq]

In fact that fake-looking making me to love HDR more than natural look.

[FZ1dave]

Uh... that truck's parked illegally. :p

I don't like the cartoonish factor that some end up with, like the truck for example. But if that's what floats your boat, sail on.

Personally I try to keep each photograph as close to the original image as possible. I don't even like doing much more than resizing and sharpening most of the time.

[Keith R]

You need a "not bothered one way or another" option in the poll, really - it's just another technique, and it has its place.

[CyberDyneSystems]

HDR or Tone mapping?
Big difference, but most don't seems to understand this.

[Samanax]

What exactly is "HDR"?

:) Cricket

[canonloader]

I really like it. I wish I could do it to birds, but getting a bird to sit still for 3 shots is ridiculous. :)

I like the kind from post #7 above. So it's not traditional, it's not supposed to be, it's art and I guarantee you, when it can be done with video, your really going to see some advertising that will blow your socks off. I think stills right now are great. I can go into flickr HDR pages and stay for hours.

I've got Photomatix Pro and used it a few times, but wish I knew more about it, especially Tone Mapping. It's time to dust off the AEB Knob I guess. :)

[|)\/8]

Uh... that truck's parked illegally. :p

I don't like the cartoonish factor that some end up with, like the truck for example. But if that's what floats your boat, sail on.

Personally I try to keep each photograph as close to the original image as possible. I don't even like doing much more than resizing and sharpening most of the time.

Lol, no the owner of the truck is really handicapped, I know because I work with him and he has a handicapped plate.

As I stated I wanted more of a painting type look and I had that in mind when I shot my 3 different exposures. Just a plain photo of the truck (as seen below) is somewhat boring unless it is your truck, lol.

http://www.dykstra.us/images/IMG_4081.jpg

[Damo77]

HDR is the selective colour of the minute. Remember not too long ago when every funky photo was black-and-white with a bit of colour in it? Now it's considered naff ... that'll happen with HDR too.

[BrantG]

Depends on the photo.

[Dan-o]

Rarely.

[BiikeMike]

The funny thing is, I haven't come across HDR anywhere but here

[TooManyShots]

I use it not because I like the look of it. I use it because the shot situation demands it. I use it to save a shot. Sometimes I would have no choice to save the shot but to use tone mapping.

[canonloader]

I would have no choice to save the shot but to use tone mapping.
I've seen some of your tone mapped stuff. How do you do it? I've got Photomatix but never quite figured it out. :)

[FZ1dave]

The funny thing is, I haven't come across HDR anywhere but here

There's a guy on the FZ1 board that uses it extensively. Almost all his shots are landscape.

[TooManyShots]

Tone mapping is the technique Photomatrix uses to for their HDR. PhotoShop CS does it differently. Tone mapping isn't exactly considered HDR because you are using the information from one single exposure or shot. Have 3 separate copies of the same shot with different brightness. A true HDR shot is comprised of 3 or more shots with different exposure information. As you can see, you can't really get a HDR shot of a moving subject.

Like my duck shots, some part of the duck has a shadow cast (face and eyes). To bring out the details, I work with one single exposure (you know, I only have one shot of the same scene). I just adjust brightness to see if I can bring out more details on the underexposed part of the duck. If I could, I have the shot with 3 different copies with 3 different brightness. Afterward, I play with the tone mapping feature in PHotomatrix in order to bring out what is natural about the shot as if underexposed sections are properly exposed.

I've seen some of your tone mapped stuff. How do you do it? I've got Photomatix but never quite figured it out. :)

[The_Camera_Poser]

Tone mapping is the technique Photomatrix uses to for their HDR. PhotoShop CS does it differently. Tone mapping isn't exactly considered HDR because you are using the information from one single exposure or shot. Have 3 separate copies of the same shot with different brightness. A true HDR shot is comprised of 3 or more shots with different exposure information. As you can see, you can't really get a HDR shot of a moving subject.

Like my duck shots, some part of the duck has a shadow cast (face and eyes). To bring out the details, I work with one single exposure (you know, I only have one shot of the same scene). I just adjust brightness to see if I can bring out more details on the underexposed part of the duck. If I could, I have the shot with 3 different copies with 3 different brightness. Afterward, I play with the tone mapping feature in PHotomatrix in order to bring out what is natural about the shot as if underexposed sections are properly exposed.


Can you post an example? That's intriguing- even to a HDR disliker like myself. I have a heck of a time getting out early enough or late enough to get well-exposed bird photos, and could benefit from that sort of thing!

[Perry Ge]

Not a fan at all of crazy tone mapped images, I think 99.9% of them suck, and look like video game screenshots. Photomatix headquarters needs to be blown up :P.

It's so misused, I don't think it's ready to be a really useful tool yet, and I can't stand it - I agree with the comment that it's like the selective colouring of the present.

[TooManyShots]

After tone mapped:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2049/2239969711_fce33f099d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/2239969711/)

Before:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2101/2244413171_75c77dfe39_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/2244413171/)




Can you post an example? That's intriguing- even to a HDR disliker like myself. I have a heck of a time getting out early enough or late enough to get well-exposed bird photos, and could benefit from that sort of thing!

[canonloader]

I understand what Tone Mapping is, I just can't seem to get to it in the program, can't find where it's hiding.

[gorby]

After tone mapped:



holy smokes! that made a world of difference!

I don't really know what 'tone mapping' is.. I suppose that is a photomatrix thing and I don't have photomatrix.

Effect use of it though, whatever it is.

[Longwatcher]

I understand what Tone Mapping is, I just can't seem to get to it in the program, can't find where it's hiding.

The simple way is to create 2 or three different .tif files with different exposure ratings and then layer them and erase out the parts you want.

I like using HDR as a tool in the situations where it can make a difference, however, it is very rare except for still life or product shots to get those situations, because as mentioned true HDR requires at least 3 different original exposures (not PS different exposures - not the same ). I always liked doing a 7 exposure set if possible and my newest toy allows for that a lot easier if I think about it before hand.

For most of what I shoot HDR is just not possible, but tone mapping is.

[The_Camera_Poser]

Big difference Too many! Something for me to look into!

[dugcross]

I love it. But I like it in a way that most people don't. I'm a graphic artist and I like to push it to get that illustrative look that most people don't like.

[Tareq]

I love it. But I like it in a way that most people don't. I'm a graphic artist and I like to push it to get that illustrative look that most people don't like.

I like that cartoonish or as you describe it, doesn't matter many don't like it, i can use it in some places and thats all, i saw a photo printed in our arts club edited by HDR, it was really great, so realistic and the details are amazing.

[TheSonofDarwin]

It's the same as any other editing effect/process. You can do B&W for any image you take - often times it just doesn't work. You could just as well ask me if I liked the creation of panoramas via multiple images - I typically hate the results of those MUCH more than a bad B&W or HDR. But to each their own, there is an audience for whatever you create, you or I may not be one of them.

[Bill Roberts]

It can be very effective, but too often it's overdone to the point that it looks totally false. If that's what you're looking for then fine, who am I to argue?

Life would be pretty boring if we all saw things in the same way!

Cheers