0

HDR - Am I the only one who doesn't get it?

Forums > Digital imaging > HDR - Am I the only one who doesn't get it?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    First · Prev | 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 | Next · Last
    MikeBonsall
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:08 AM
    0

    Well the HDR bug seems to have finally taken a firm hold here on EPZ.

    Now I'm all for people experimenting with new techniques and technologies and I must admit that I have seen a few images where HDR has helped produce spectacular results, however, the proliferation of the 'new style' of HDR images leaves me cold (and in some cases actually feeling quite ill!). You know the ones - weird contrast, lurid, un-natural colours, bleached, grey skies etc etc.

    A friend of mine asked why I didn't post my pictures on Flickr. Well I took a look at the site and it seemed that every other image was an attempt at HDR - in many cases where there was no logical need for employing this technique. Hopefully EPZ won't go the same way, I don't think my eyes could take it!

    Perhaps I'm in a minority of one here. What does everyone else think?

    Mike

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:08 AM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    nikguyatt
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:13 AM
    0

    Hi

    Might be being thick here, but whats HDR, could someone post a link to one?

    Cheers
    Nik

    It'll just be a phase, like the 'Dragan' portraits we had a while ago.

    HDR is a useful technique in the right hands and used in the right circumstances, but I have to agree that it can be misused. The results end up looking more like a 'painting with light' experiment than a natural image with a high dynamic range.

    Tony

    joolsb
    joolsb (e2 Member)
    7
    26711 forum postsjoolsb vcard Switzerland37 Constructive Critique Points
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:14 AM
    0

    It's just a passing fad. In a few months all the sheep will be on to something else.

    I have to agree, though. Badly done HDR really looks awful.

    Mike

    I see the software being used in both ways. As a professional photographic tool it will allow photographers to take shots which were previously impossible. It has tremendous use in commercial applications, photographing interiors of hotel rooms, atriums, commercial space etc

    As a creative tool I have already seen a huge number of photos which are unusually tone mapped and adjusted. The best of this style of image has been represented on here by Paul Stefan - who's work appeals to me greatly from an artistic point of view.

    Lurid use of the technology isn't to my taste either, however people should see fit to express themselves creatively how they wish.

    Im looking forward to an exciting 18 months of HDR!

    Dan


    Quote: It'll just be a phase, like the 'Dragan' portraits we had a while ago.

    Im afraid that is totally wrong.

    HDR is going to be one of the biggest revoloutions in professional photography since digital!

    Smile

    keithh
    8
    20891 forum posts Wallis and Futuna6 Constructive Critique Points
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:19 AM
    0

    But first, Mike, you need to see the difference between HDR images and Tone Mapping. Much of what you are seeing on EPZ at the moment is badly done Tone Mapping.

    However...anybody who thinks that HDR is a passing fad is going to be left behind. It's a technology that will become used more and more.

    User_Removed
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:23 AM
    0


    Quote: ou need to see the difference between HDR images and Tone Mapping.

    Any chance you can explain for us Keith? You might already have done, but I must've missed it if you have - There are that many HDR threads right now! ;o)

    mattmatic
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:25 AM
    0

    Agree with Keith.

    HDR is more than just more bits - it allows the storage and representation of levels of dark and light that are impossible to represent with convention display and print technologies. In fact, OpenEXR (www.openexr.com) is a file format that's been used in the movies for some time by ILM. It's worth checking out that web site for a detailed description of what HDR actually is.

    Then there's tone-mapping - the process of squishing all that massive range into something you can view on the web or print. That's the tricky part and is not simple by any means. I very much suspect it is the tone-mapping algorithms that will change over the coming months.
    (Found some very interesting articles on the web about all this...)

    I did a very quick test of some software and with a little care you can get surprising results - especially when you compare what you'd get with just a single exposure...

    But, do that tone-mapping badly and you get a yucky, flat, uninteresting mess because often the mid-tones are so badly compressed.

    Matt

    Ooops - obviously a bit misunderstood. I just meant that the mass of postings would be a passing fad the same as any new technique.

    I am in no doubt as to the possibilities that HDR offers, and as with a lot of these techniques - when done well you won't particularly notice that it's been done at all, just look at Keiths picture of his car for an example.

    Tony

    Tone mapping is done post creation of the HDR image ... using controls such as luminosity, saturation, black and white clipping ..

    Tone mapping essentially allows you to adjust the balance in the image.

    HDR is essentially the process of blending 4-9 differently exposed images to create one final photo that retains detail in both the highlights and shadows. Effectively covering the whole dynamic range of the scene in front of you.

    Dan

    (PS - I have tried to keep it simple as it was James asking ;-0)

    MikeBonsall
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:32 AM
    0

    I agree entirely about HDR being a major part of the ongoing digital imaging revolution. There's no way that this technology/technique is just a passing fad.

    I guess I just wish that sometimes people would step back and look at the image they've just created and say to themselves 'does that work, is it any good, have I used this technique successfully etc'.

    The availability of new, cheap, cutting-edge and user-friendly software is obviously fantastic but it does often result in lots of clueless bandwagon jumping unfortunately.

    paulstefan
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:36 AM
    0


    Quote: but it does often result in lots of clueless bandwagon jumping unfortunately

    Ouch!
    I think that's a tad harsh - whilst I agree that some of the examples on EPZ just don't work, there's nothing wrong with someone experimenting is there?

    mark2uk
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:39 AM
    0

    Can someone please post a link to a picture to an HDR image and one to a tone mapped image - just so I get an idea.

    Thanks
    Mark

    PS. No bandwagon jumping here - just want to know what the hell your talking about!

    Kris_Dutson
    11 Jan 2007 - 10:40 AM
    0

    Oh the irony of it all.

    A few years back I used to blend, admitedly only two or three, images of the same subject exposed differently together, as I had no ND grads. I received many comments along the lines of, they're ok but not the pukka way of doing things - get it right in the field. Now it seems HDR is the way to go and will be perfectly acceptable.

    Ho hum.

    Wink

    First · Prev | 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 | Next · Last

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.