HDR Portrait

[anvilimage]

A local metal band wanted me to do some shots for them and they like the gritty look of some of my HDR shots. I wouldn't normally turn to HDR for shooting people, but for these guys, I think it worked out...

http://gallery.anvilimage.com/Photography/People/CD-Final-HDR-3/818672563_f3SHv-XL.jpg

There are a couple more on my blog here (http://anvilimage.com/2010/03/24/crushdown-in-hdr-at-the-gate/).

[azpix]

cool back drop and i think the processing works although I wouldn't call it an HDR.

[anvilimage]

Hmmm... I'm curious. Why not?

[FlyingPhotog]

Hmmm... I'm curious. Why not?

This would be "Tone Mapped" but not HDR...

You don't have a dynamic range in this image that really requires HDR.

[wolfden]

HDR or not, it has a good look to it and fits it very well.

[dugcross]

This would be "Tone Mapped" but not HDR...

You don't have a dynamic range in this image that really requires HDR.

I agree. It doe's look good though.

[Gary McDuffie]

Agree with Doug. Grunge look for a grunge band? :)

[anvilimage]

Thanks for your comments!

Whether you agree that it is HDR or not, the fact that it was indeed the result of a three image bracket (0,+2,-2) shot handheld, combined in Photomatix into a 32 bit image, tonemapped, further cleaned up in PS and fine tuned in Lightroom 2 is not withstanding.

[kirkt]

The observation that the image is "not HDR" has more to do with the dynamic range of the scene versus the workflow that produced the image. You can take a bracketed set of exposures of a black wall in a dark room, combine those exposures in Photomatix, tonemap that data and do whatever you want to it. The scene did not contain the dynamic range that would require or benefit from the HDR concept - that does not mean that you cannot apply the HDR workflow, it just means that the image data was not HDR.

You could probably (I am guessing here) take your "0" (or best) exposure and, with a little tweaking in LR, run it through Photomatix and get the same, or similar, final image. You could probably just use that single exposure and tweak it in LR and PS and get the same result with some curves and local contrast boosts (HiRaLoAm USM, Clarity, High Pass). No biggie either way.

If you like your image, fantastic!

Kirk

[Gibbo]

I'm curious too..

I understand what Kirk is saying, the effect used on the image above could probably be achieved with a single exposure..but surely how a picture looks doesn't change the fact that it is still a HDR image?

[FlyingPhotog]

I'm curious too..

I understand what Kirk is saying, the effect used on the image above could probably be achieved with a single exposure..but surely how a picture looks doesn't change the fact that it is still a HDR image?

Depends on your definition of HDR...

Is it a technique, a process or a result?

[Gibbo]

Depends on your definition of HDR...

Is it a technique, a process or a result?

well i suppose i'm asking the same question.. i thought i knew what it was.

[kirkt]

The scene defines the dynamic range. How you capture the scene depends upon the device you use. If the scene's dynamic range can be captured in a single exposure, then it is likely not a "high dynamic range" scene given the typical dSLR's ability versus that of the human brain. Again, you could use hdr techniques to capture that same scene, but your capture strategy does not change the dynamic range of the scene. Sometimes, using hdr techniques "just because" actually will produce inferior results in a scene that does not require it, namely due to the artifacts introduced in the hdr combination process.

All that aside, if you like it, go for it.

Kirk

[verb1]

I really like the look. Fits them perfectly. Not sure I'd of chosen the GG for the background, but maybe that's what they wanted. Still, it's a hot photo, though.

[FredH999]

Beautiful example of a rock & roll image.
This should be acceptable to Rolling Stone, a CD cover, poster, etc.

Nicely done.

Fred