is real looking boring?

After seeing some of the shots done taken with the HDR method, most of the pictures seem unreal and It looks like people like this better. That is, they prefer an unreal looking picture to a real looking one. Could this be that the real looking ones are boring (and they want to scape from it), or when they get used to this fad they'll go back to prefer the real one? What you think?

I think a lot of the HDR stuff is an example of the gimick overriding the content. There are examples of HDR where the technique enhances the content of the photo, but a lot of times it just looks ridiculous.

People should think about the content and message of their pictures. If HDR somehow enhances that message then good.

A lot of HDR photos do look unreal and less interesting because they lack shadows.

A good time to use HDR is when shooting a landscape that requires the use of a graduated/split ND filter. When there is a large disparity between the exposure for the sky and land, and one lacks the necessary ND filter, then HDR can be used to capture the scene as it really appears in nature.

thanks Chp!

well, I like HDR and I think is great that we have it. I have nothing against it and like you said, it can give you a better representation of the visual reality. But at the same time it gives the oportunity for people to boost the tones and make it super rich in dynamic variations of colors, etc, making it a "wuauuu, it filled up my eye and I like it. it is so bright I need sunglasses and lotion" I guess it gives a boost punch, but it does not represent what the photographer saw at the time.

I recently tried shooting some flowers. I don't shoot flowers. what I captured was not a typical tulip shot as it has a small spider with a large drop of water on its' rear. Then a senior member said that unless I tried an HDR tutorial and apply it to the shot it was a useless picture.

HDR on a summer flower shot seemed rather odd...

See the bottom of my sig.

cosworth, I like your quote and I am going to use it on my club websites. Its a great reminder that its not about all about perfection. I remember that Capa's D-day pictures were badly damaged in what I think was a darkroom accident and only a few survived to be printed. The remaining images weren't perfect, but they were awesome.

I like HDR, but like most techniques, it has its place and it will settle there in the end.

Yes, an overzelous technician rushed the development process and then overdryed the negatives I beleive. Only a few frames were salvaged. If you leave negatives in the dryer to long I think the emulsion melts off.

As for fun photography not being a crime... I agree 100%. A lot of people even in the digital age are using holgas and pinhole cameras to create more spontaneous imagery.

I kind off feel the same about ultra-wide shots, often the most interesting thing about them (at least to me) is that they are ultra-wide. I'm not in to HDR ect. I'm little in to 'Aesthetic Realism' http://www.terraingall​ery.org/