Before The Rain - HDR or Not?

[sapearl]

This was done right before the sky opened up on a very pleasant Labor Day weekend. Do you think I used HDR or not, and if so, why? - Stu

=>

[Picture North Carolina]

Well, Stu... I'll bite.

If you did, it's a good job.

First, I'm looking for telltale signs such as halos along that tree line. However, the halos show up in areas of high contrast - such would be the case if the sky were clear and brighter. But here with the overcast, the contrast between the sky and trees is low.

On the other hand, the water coming over the wall has that slightly "sharpish" or "edgy" look that is sometimes created in the HDR process.

So, I can't really tell by looking at the picture.

The only evaluating factor left is you. Knowing you're a good photographer, and knowing that you know that an overcast scene like this would be well within the DR of the camera, I would say no - you did not use HDR.

(P.S. - consider cloning out that tiny tree top sticking up at the bottom.)

[mickee311]

I say no, based on the fact that you're asking in the first place :)

[sapearl]

Well..... that is a valid supposition.....maybe, but perhaps it's what I want you to think I'm asking as the real reason, as a distraction....;). We'll wait for a few more comments.

But thanks for taking the time to look Jenn.

I say no, based on the fact that you're asking in the first place :)

[shannyD]

i think yes... and maybe its because i suck..but whenever its cloudy before a storm. i cant ever seem to expose the sky right, and blow it out all the time. and there is texture left in your sky, and just a lt of wonderful detail in this photo, and texture as well.

shannon

[cgatto]

I agree with some of CannedHeat's points. There are no obvious HDR side effects, so if it is in fact HDR, it's very subtle and very well executed. However, I vote "NO"!

[buddy4344]

HDR feel to it. Flat, yet with a 3d feel to elements like treeline and limbs in the foreground water. I think you did HDR then reblended with original.

[samueli]

I'm going with no HDR. I think this is a perfectly attainable result adjusting color channels and curves for B&W.

[sapearl]

Dan - your fine art work has always told me you have a keen eye for exposure, and your evaluation of the kind of lighting available is correct. I did not use HDR.

As I'm sure you know, water can be very very challenging to photograph if there is any sort of bright light source. The highlights tend to blow out, detail is lost and you have to choose an exposure that either favors brightness or shadow detail. It's hard to split the difference. This is where film often excelled.

The lighting here could not have been more perfect: uniform overcast right before the cloudburst, even flat lighting.... large uniform light source... everything I needed to concentrate on detail and tonal range.

Well, Stu... I'll bite.

If you did, it's a good job.

First, I'm looking for telltale signs such as halos along that tree line. However, the halos show up in areas of high contrast - such would be the case if the sky were clear and brighter. But here with the overcast, the contrast between the sky and trees is low.

On the other hand, the water coming over the wall has that slightly "sharpish" or "edgy" look that is sometimes created in the HDR process.

So, I can't really tell by looking at the picture.

The only evaluating factor left is you. Knowing you're a good photographer, and knowing that you know that an overcast scene like this would be well within the DR of the camera, I would say no - you did not use HDR.

(P.S. - consider cloning out that tiny tree top sticking up at the bottom.)

[sapearl]

Shannon, your shots certainly do NOT suck. I took a look at some of your flickr work and you have some very pleasing images there. Things can usually be improved upon - as applies to my work also - but you have some solid materia.

Actually, a cloudy uniform storm would be easy to meter for. Just pick some middle tone in the scene that you feel would be splitting the difference between overall light and dark, and that will place you in the ballpark.

The other detail effects I achieve in PP - I first started out with a color image that was actually oversaturated. I bump it up that way so I have more to play with in my channel adjustments for b/w conversion. That's one of my little "cheats" that I discovered. - Stu

i think yes... and maybe its because i suck..but whenever its cloudy before a storm. i cant ever seem to expose the sky right, and blow it out all the time. and there is texture left in your sky, and just a lt of wonderful detail in this photo, and texture as well.

shannon

[asty80]

The falls have an HDR feel to it..the trees dont....
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Picture North Carolina]

i think yes... and maybe its because i suck..

shannon

Shannon, your shots certainly do NOT suck.

Shannon, sorry... going to have to disagree with you and agree with Stuart here. ;) I see no cause for self-denigration.

In addition to some very nice shots, you also have some very nice treatments too - such as the vignetted palm tree. Also the surrealistic-looking turkeys in the field - the foreground shadow and tree frame the shot, drawing the eyes to the center creating a great lighting effect.