Hdr

[northbeach]

Since we're starting to get HDR images in byte now and it's already stirred up a bit of controversy I thought it might be good to get an airing on it.

While I don't personally care for the HDR look when it's exaggerated and produces what look to me like oversaturated images - kind of like in the dark ages when Technicolor pictures first came out the color was blinding. People oohed and aaahed but if you look at an old Technicolor movie nowadays it seems garish.

So I think HDR and how it's used will go through phases and I think it probably needs to do that before it grows up and settles down.

Is it appropriate for the contest? I think it's within the present guidelines. "Remember photos should only be edited to improve the final image not totally change it. "

I've always been in favor of categories here although Admin. is not but if anyone feels strongly this is the place to discuss that or contact them directly. They do take notice of posts here in the Forums whether they agree with them or not your voice will be heard.

It might appear a little bit unfair that some people have better cameras, more lenses, filters etc. Some of us only have very simple equipment. Not everyone can afford the bells and whistles and expensive programs like Photoshop. But if you're taking good photographs your work will be appreciated. I would put up the images of any of the great old time photographers against any HDR or IR image today and their creativity and quality will hold up.

Sheila.

[Buddy4344]

Sheila,
I agree with much of what you say, however, HDR is really a technique designed to bring into view parts of an image greater than 2 or 3 exposures apart. Many of Ansel Adam's greatest works did this in a traditional dark room. You can do HDR with basic post processing, but it is made much easier with advanced plug-ins that cost a fair amount.

I like HDR - but view it in a different light (pun intended). I personally consider this to significantly change to the image - but I am adequately confident in my skills and happy with this site's feedback such that I will leave it up to the judges. I will admit that in final 6 voting I will always bias my vote toward great composition or extraordinary camera work - whether HDR or not vs. merely well done post processing.

[Shaggydoo]

HDR processing by itself does not produce oversaturated photos-highly detailed,perhaps,but not over-saturated. Over-saturation is more likely to be the result of other processing techniques. Afterall,we've all seen single exposures with those larger than life greens,reds and yellows. What I see as a potential problem with HDR processing is overuse. By that I mean, producing a mutiple exposure photo when a single exposure would suffice
Andrew

[northbeach]

I suspect what Andrew says is true - lots of new things are over-used...I think tools in PS sometimes get over-used, sharpening springs to mind most readily and cloning.

It's going to be interesting to watch.

Sheila

[johno60]

I'm not going to defend HDR as I have only started to experiment in it (you can checked my gallery and only my last two shots have been an attempt at HDR) I guess there is a time and place when HDR can be used, that in itself is subject to the person taking the photo, then later on, the viewer.

My general view on photography is to try and achieve the best result I can in the camera and I have never been one for heavy post processing.

Shelia, I hope I'm not misquoting, so apologies in advance, but you wrote "It might appear a little bit unfair that some people have better cameras, more lenses, filters etc. Some of us only have very simple equipment. Not everyone can afford the bells and whistles and expensive programs like Photoshop."

I shoot with a Canon 300D, I'd love a 1D and realise the people that have one, and their L series lenses have an advantage in photo quality only, so I don't think that's a real problem when photos are posted on the net, but in a print contest, that might be different. As for not affording programs such as Photoshop, would you suggest that photo websites, maybe such as this one for example, have a caveat on maximum equipment to be used? Photoshop Elements as the maximum? 5MP cameras?

Just to clarify what I said to FredS that if he thought that my photo shouldn't be in the contest, I would remove it in a heartbeat. (Also bear in mind that I have a HDR shot in this week's finalists, which I would have no problem removing).

I think in future I will experiment with HDR for my own personal use and not post any (unless a category specifically asks for one)

regards
John

[Buddy4344]

John,
I am on the fence on this one....but I do know this: I have seen folks post in the contest; note in the title or description the image is not there for winning the contest, but rather to solicit feedback comments on the shot or merely state that the photo uses HDR.

As i noted earlier - it is up to the judges to see if the photo is "legal", but by letting folks know up front what has been done, you are letting the world know that you are open on the debate, but wish to be an active participant on Byte. I think we can all win that way.

BTW, for the record, my bokeh is far superior now that I am shooting at 24-105 with L glass and I don't consider this an unfair advantage. Also I am regularly amazed by a few members from India who have been shooting with limited equipment but great imagination....and when I can afford more pro level lenses, I plan to obtain them.

[STaylor]

hdr (high dynamic range) ’‚’‚…‚’‚‚¦

.. cannot inmo make a poorly executed photo into a true contest contender ..

the photographer still needs to master and execute overall composition, dof, rule of thirds, lines, balance, framing, subject etc. .. and as such I’‚’‚…‚’‚…¾‚m inclined to allow them to continue in the potw ...

[milkod2001]

HDR technique does not completely change image, it only helps to get max. from it. It does not work with every image and when not used carefully it can produce "overcooked" results. It's just one of the many techniques that sometimes helps...
Milan

[JoeMc]

My take on this is that it CAN alter the actual scene dramtically
A perfect example is how it can make clouds look..Because they move within the time lapse of different shots it gives them a much more dramatic look than the eye really encountered...I have played with it and like it! But, when I do it I understand that I am munipulating what my eyes see sometimes.....and if everything stayed perfectly still, and everything was infocus then it's just a vivid shot!!! Shooting with a very good lens at f/22 pretty well makes everything in focus too....If you have the light on your side.


I think it boils down to personal preference! As for the compatition.......The site only picks the top six.......We chose from there!

As for expensive camera's and lenses....I will buy as many as my wife will let me......LOL

Cheers,
Joe