HDR need critique please

[lexart]

http://i31.tinypic.com/2zfpsac.jpg

This shot was from Dubai Mall... HDR from three exposures
Critique please THANKS

[joedlh]

This is not a great shot, I am sorry to say.

1. You posted an image that is too big to view in one piece on most monitors. This makes it very difficult to assess composition.

2. The purple parts are blown out and seem out of register.

3. Shallow depth of field. The buildings on the left and in the foreground are out of focus.

4. Sky is noisy.

5. Some of the highlights appear to be out of register. A solid tripod is essential in HDR shots, as is a constant aperture in all constituent exposures in order to avoid depth of field artifacts.

6. The subject is not clear. My eye is drawn to the circular structure. However, it's out of focus, too far to the left, and cut off.

[DragonDan]

I think this is a good start. I'm experimenting with HDR as well. The main thing is to have a subject matter, HDR or not. This shot just makes my eye wander about, without anything specific to land on.
The colors are fun, even though the purple is a bit too much. The main thing that catches me is that the entire thing seems too soft. If you didn't use a tripod, please do so next time.

Keep at it!

[crashthenet44]

+1 to what joe said. Sums up nicely where this shot lost its way.

[Kevin Curtis]

i agree. its doesn't really even look like an HDR to me. It just looks like a longer exposure night shot. How many images did you use?

[lexart]

Im glad to read your crits. I am still new in photography and HDR.
This is another HDR shot I took. Same scene. I only use three photographs in my HDR using canon 500D.

http://i27.tinypic.com/20a6g3t.jpg

[DerekSimon]

Not being too negative but I do agree with what the others have said. It really isn't a great example of an HDR but you are on the right track. Don't get discouraged with one bad one though.

[lexart]

Many thanks to you guys... actually, its encouraging.

[deeslk]

The second photo is a lot sharper, first one seemed a bit soft.

[Leonid Photography]

i like the second picture a lot more looks good. Just keep practicing with HDR it takes a lot to get good at making them.

[crashthenet44]

Second still has lots of noise and marginally sharper than the first. I question why you'd choose to chop the top off of the building and not just shoot this in vertical format to capture all of your subject.

I also still question the need to make this an HDR. I'm not seeing what it brings to the photo that a long exposure shot can not.

[crashthenet44]

Double post.

[vpnd]

I would like to see 2 things to start. The image lacks any depth at all. Also it is hard to look at with the white balance like that. Everything looks like mud.

[GorgeShooter]

IMO it would have been better suited for a single exposure instead of an HDR.

[DreDaze]

IMO it would have been better suited for a single exposure instead of an HDR.


+1...post the regular exposure i think it'd probably look better because nothing would look strange from the processing...

i think HDR is necessary when there are shadows and highlights...a night shot isn't really the spot that i would choose to use HDR