I know many people don't like HDR, what about these? Comment pls~!!!

[john0213]

Hi,

I've just started photography for a month and these are my recent works. I'm currently walking through my learning curve with HDR.

How can i improve these shots?

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j318/john0213/Photography/HDR/IMG_5955_1_2_3_4_0-2.jpg

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j318/john0213/Photography/HDR/IMG_5949_5_6_7_8.jpg

This is a previous work, the very first daytime HDR i've ever done. I know for a fact i got the focus and focal distance completely off so the background was kinda soft. Because the background wasn't ideally focused in the first place, i've went ahead and used the soft clarity theme to try to set off that japanese garden mood. Not sure if i'm doing it correctly though.
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j318/john0213/Photography/HDR/IMG_5600_598_599-3Soft.jpg

Also one of my early work, the picture quality was quite good to begin with so the HDR wasn't exactly helping the image by far.
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j318/john0213/Photography/HDR/IMG_5446_5_4LM.jpg

[APG-Angus]

Let me start by saying I like HDR's when someone does them well. I have not tried them, I have enough to worry about staying inside the dynamic range of my gear. When I can master that I will try to tease the extremes of HDR. Its kinda like infrared photograpghy, I love looking at good IF images but I have enough trouble with visible light to even begin to try to tackle the invisible!

#1 is fine, The composition holds no interest for me but I really like the colors and the exposure.

#2 is the best, it is both interesting has good colors, range and textures. I just wish the sign was in focus. I really like this image.

#3 I do not know how many images were used to make this merge but I would dare wager that any one of them alone would be better than this result. If you were going for the "Printed on a cheap printer using copier paper and hung on a cubicle wall for a year" look than you nailed it. HDR is high dynamic RANGE not "get rid of all the shadows and wash it all out".

#4 Well I don't really know how someone doing photography for just a month can have "early work". But if the picture quaility was "quite good" you should post that as a comparison. This is not good anymore.

Can I guess from the examples and from what you've posted that you are taking one image and creating different exposure by adjusting brightness or "exposure within a program? If so are you shooting jpeg? Neither of these are the best starts to a good HDR, even doing simply 3 bracketed exposures gives you so much more data to work with, shooting RAW gives you more still. Good HDR's require a lot of data, the more you start with the better the potential end product will be. Again, I do not do HDR's myself but I do like them when they are done well.

Please, don't take what I say personally, its not a lot of advice but I think its sound.

[Metalstrm]

I like the first couple. In short, you didn't overdo the effect. The tones are good, though the colors may be a bit oversaturated. Well done on those. Having said that, the compositions are so so. I would try and find an interesting subject and work on it.

[photoguy6405]

I also like HDR when it's not over-done. Sometimes it look cartoonish to me.

#1 is the best of the 4 to me. Good colors.

#2 has good colors, but the shot itself is too busy.

#3 looks fuzzy to me, and over-saturated.

#4 I'm not sure about.

[lookingforaname]

You might want to post in the HDR forum.


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=130

[RMXSeven]

I would have gone for #1.
My only issue with it is the large panel on the top left. It's a little distracting.
Otherwise, I quite like the colours.

~Ronen

[john0213]

I thank you so much for all the comment, it definitely gives me a lot of insight.

Interestingly, I have this feeling that photography is just like learning language, the proofreading that I had when i was in grade 5 start all over again. The more i dig into photography, the more challenge I find and the more i love it!

APG-Angus:
#4 is considered as early work because I shot it the second week after i got my camera. LOL anyways, to answer your questions, I do shoot with RAW and make exposure bracketing in the camera. I've recently found out though, the more exposure level one is including in an HDR, the better the result. I'm still in the stage of trail and error so i'm at that hit and miss kind of thing now.

and really, please don't feel bad for giving me advice. If we don't have members like you that are willing to spend time to examine and analysis other members' works, this section would have been meaningless. I'm still very low level in the photography world, but i definitely have the passion to improve in photography.

Metalstrm:
I guess i should look at other people's photos more. I think creative composition is one of my weakness that i really need to work on it.

Again, I thank you so much for all the advice! I am so happy to be a member in here! anyways, one more thing, if i was to use an ultra wide angle, would you guys think that these photo could be a lot more interesting?

[john0213]

here is the original one from #4 without HDR

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j318/john0213/Photography/Landscape/IMG_5446-2.jpg

[Derricklmnop]

I think the original looks a lot better. The HDR one looks underexposed IMO.

[john0213]

lesson learnt... HDR isn't always better LOL

I guess this is one of the very hard part for newbie, choosing an appropriate format and using the appropriate setting to post process an image to create the best result...

[Tawcan]

#1 is probably the best. #3 is way too saturated and you start to get the halo effect. For #4 the original is better, the HDR version is too blue and a bit underexposed.

I do a bit of HDR stuff but generally I try to do a more realistic look HDR rather than the over-saturated cartoonish look HDR. But that's just me.

[superdat1]

i really like 1&2

[Stutterbug]

really like number 2 a lot

[john0213]

thx guys~! great to know you guys enjoy the shot!

[Metalstrm]

lesson learnt... HDR isn't always better LOL

I guess this is one of the very hard part for newbie, choosing an appropriate format and using the appropriate setting to post process an image to create the best result...

Well done on understanding that bit. At the beginning, everyone feels too excited about trying out HDRs cause they are, well, very "poppy". I think that HDR should be used only to enhance the tonal range of the camera, and not the colors so much. Having said that, I personally feel that it is more satisfying to put a few layered images in PS and work on them to get a wide tonal range than to let Photomatix do it for you.

[john0213]

i have to completely agree on this.

photomatix doesn't always work. with this software, it's always a hit or miss kinda thing. when photomatix nails it, yes the result can be astonishing. However, if it understands the photo completely off, then it might take even more work to have it corrected on PS then to start up from scratch in PS itself.

Photomatix is definitely a good starter to get a grip on HDR and it does give very good understanding for us newbie to try out new things easily. However, i can see, in the very soon future, that I will go primarily back to PS for HDR to get that control on the range.

Funny thing is, whenever i import these images into photomatix, it always reminds me of the feeling when i was a kids waiting to open the christmas present in christmas.