Get 5% off Loupedeck CT with code: Ephotozine5

HDR & judges

Dvaid 11 257 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 10:43AM
What is it with judges that they don't like HDR?

Is it that they cant do it, don't understand it, or are just stick in the muds not wishing to change with the times. Admittedly there is some awful HDR images out there but equally there is some really good stuff too.

A judge that announces that he just doesn't like it, and that he "smells a hint of HDR" isn't giving support to the enthusiast produced it & who may just have a great image in the making, sometime in the future. Its like saying they don't like birds on sticks, or tattooed models.
collywobles 16 4.0k 10 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 10:46AM
........ or even digital cameras'. There are some people who leap forward and relish new challenges, there are others who have to be dragged into the modern world.
KevSB 16 1.5k 5 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 10:57AM
Its there choice as a judge, I have nothing but respect for them making the effort, with respect and no offence but are you not making a judgement against there choices. The fact is before moaning about them we should get off our bums and do it ourselves before criticizing others. Pete gets criticized regular for his choices on here by which ever part of the community does not agree with his choices, and over the years his choices have changed. a lot.
keith selmes 17 7.4k 1 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 11:02AM
Some people have used HDR as a style, which not everyone likes.

I expect more people use HDR as a regular tool, in such a way that you can't usually see it, and if you can see it, it hasn't really succeeded.

The judge could be grumbling for either reason ?
If they just have a thing about HDR as a technique I would think that very silly, if they're not happy with the way it's been used, it would be a different matter.
GarethRobinson 14 1.0k 2 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 11:10AM
High Dynamic Rejects.
mikehit 11 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 11:16AM

Quote:What is it with judges that they don't like HDR?

What makes you say that? Is it the low quantity of HDR images that are praised by the judges? If so, perhaps that is indicative of the low number of (what I would call) decent quality HDR images? I have seen several images that I was surprised to learn later were HDR and showed to me that it is possible to use HDR to enhance an image and not as an end in itself - and where HDR is a case of smack-in-your-face overprocessing, then I guess it is being judged as any overprocessed image would be: some you love and some you don't.

I have seen some judges judge pictures against the great tenets of photography (rule of thirds, space for the person to move into, person looking at the camera instead of away from it etc) and lose sight of the most important one: 'does the image work'.
ade_mcfade 16 15.2k 216 England
15 May 2013 11:22AM
I get the impression, from reading this forum, that all judges, without exception, are evil Luddites

is this correct?
GarethRobinson 14 1.0k 2 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 11:28AM
They are the devils
Dvaid 11 257 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 11:41AM
No they are usually capable photographers themselves with vast if sometimes outdated experience and skills, who give up their time for us, and thus improve our standards.

However carte blanche derision of HDRs should not be accepted.

Thank goodness for the judges who put "chateau" in the wining three on the transcend competition.
thewilliam 12 6.1k
15 May 2013 11:42AM
In the good old days of wet printing in the darkroom, we used to dodge and burn pretty well every print to some extent. If the viewer couldn't see what we'd done, then it had been done well.

HDR is basically doing the same thing and it can bring an image to life. Like most effects, it's exquisite when done with restraint but horrible when done clumsily.
mikehit 11 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 11:59AM

Quote: However carte blanche derision of HDRs should not be accepted.

I don't think anyone's disagreeing with you, but I would still be interested to know what led to your opening sentence.

IMO there was nothing particularly brave about putting chateau in the final three - it is a good photograph and the fact it is HDR seems irrelevant. Doesn't its inclusion disprove your opening comment?
keithh 16 25.7k 33 Wallis And Futuna
15 May 2013 12:05PM
Is it because the camera club judges have bigger halos than the images they are supposed to be judging?

conrad 16 10.9k 116
15 May 2013 12:09PM

Quote:Doesn't its inclusion disprove your opening comment?

If he meant to include judges for EPZ competitions, yes, but I suspect he meant camera club judges.

Quote:it is a good photograph and the fact it is HDR seems irrelevant

Exactly what the OP wants, I should say, because he wants the photo judged as it is seen, not as an image made in a certain way and therefore objectionable. And I agree. How something is made should be irrelevant, as long as you made it yourself according to the rules of whatever competition it is that you entered it into.
ade_mcfade 16 15.2k 216 England
15 May 2013 12:25PM
t'only problem with HDR is people getting upset about it Wink
puertouk 9 1.1k 17 United Kingdom
15 May 2013 12:34PM
A lot of judges live in the past I'm afraid, but are judges the be-all and end-all of photography? Just because one person says it's junk does not make it junk to someone else. Each person has differing feelings of a image. I've seen images a judge raved about, but I thought it was dreadful. Maybe when it's a panel of judges, then it should be more balanced on what they say. I see images in magazines taken by Pros and feel they would not get a vote on this site. A lot of my clients are in photography clubs and are always moaning about judges. All I can say is, don't let the b*#@~+ds grind you down.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.