HDR. Do you like it?

Personally I find it is abused. After experimenting with it a while I have come to the conclusion that it is 'useful' but most of the time it's not what I want. I want the image to look nice obviously. But if I want to overcook a shot I will use other filtering techniques and effects.

I want HDR to look similar to how my eye (Or my minds eye) envisions it. If I can get close to what I saw in terms of overall dynamic range then that is what I would like to get.

I want to use it for blown out skies vs dark subject/forground/grou​nd. Exposing for the sky is fine but then trying to bring up the dark areas in PP resulting in noise. HDR can address those issues to a certain extent.

Yet I see time and time again it being used (abused) for effect only. Even on shots I would not consider good shots in the first place.

I've even seen so called tutorials from so called pro's and been unimpressed with their heavy handedness using the technique.

How do you feel about HDR? Useful tool or over used excuse for 'art'?

Just to show I am not totally against HDR here is one of my own recent shots put through the process. I like it. Maybe a tad oversaturated is all.

I don't mind it but I really think 99.9% of it is way overdone. Unless you are trying to get that overboard effect I don't think HDR shots should look so crazy...

Jon.

I personally love HDR as long as it is realistic looking, I personally don't really like HDR photos that look too paintery.

With HDR, the biggest problem is that some people cannot show restraint and insist on using it on virtually all their work including the most mundane of subjects. When it works, the results can be awe inspiring but when it fails it makes a horrible mess with blacks turned to greys, burnt out skies and worst of all ghosting due to wind movement between exposures.

I love HDR. Even badly done (mine).

Bracketing is for the unsure.

I personally have no problem with it as long as the results are realistic looking. For that I think it's a great tool. Too many either don't know when to stop, or choose to take it too far, and that ruins it.

I also don't mind if it's so far gone that it is used for extreme effect itself and doesn't even pretend to be realistic. That's ok too, though not really my cup of tea.

I like it as well and think its fun.

The whole idea of HDR is to overcome the limitations of the dynamic range of film or sensors and output an image that's closer to what the human eye can see. It's a tool, though, and not the be-all/end-all for photography. It should fit the concept the photographer has of what an image should be, and learning the digital processing techniques aside, it really shouldn't be done just for it's own sake.

That said, I do enjoy the occasional image with more or less souped-up tonemapping, as long as it says something. Too many folks are simply jumping on the over-tonemapped bandwagon because they have a computer and a camera, and seeing all those overdone images is getting old fast.

Art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder, but no technique will ever make up for a lousy subject, poor composition, poor technique, etc. I see too many overcooked images being done just for their own sake, or to cover up flaws.

For me, the ideal is to have the viewer see a photo and go 'wow' and look a little longer or twice, without being consciously aware that it's an HDR image. Maybe if I really apply myself, one day I'll produce an image like that. At least that's my goal. IMHO

No different than any other PP technique.

I'm cool with HDR.

If someone overdoes it, it's not HDR's fault.

corkneyfonz wrote in post #9317303
With HDR, the biggest problem is that some people cannot show restraint and insist on using it on virtually all their work including the most mundane of subjects.

I wish people would care more about composition of HDRs; most do nothing compositionally for me. In that sense, it seems bery newbish, but a well composed, well processed HDR is outstanding artwork.

I don't mind a slight HDR look (like highly saturated colors) but I agree a lot of people take it too far and I also see a lot of negligence in the basics of shooting. It's like people think if they can candy it up with HDR, it will be awesome, regardless of what the subject is and how they've composed it. Wrong. All you've done is make an HDR of a bad shot - it's still a bad shot. Photomatix doesn't make you a good photographer.

Other times, I think people just don't know what they're doing with HDR and wind up with problems like strong halos. Another pet peeve of mine is the pastel-like colors (I guess it's possible some people like that and do it on purpose but personally - ugh!).

mikekelley wrote in post #9317561
Bracketing is for the unsure.

Bracketing does not imply HDR.

And you're right.

But it's usually the first ingredient

mikekelley wrote in post #9321129
And you're right.

But it's usually the first ingredient

As is metering and focusing. Are those also for the unsure?

Bracketing is a perfectly valid technique to deal with high contrast scenes.

So is using flash, filters, improvising on site, waiting for better light etc.

Just not a fan, and you're not going to convince me otherwise