Get Up To 30% Off Regatta Waterproof Jackets

To HDR or not to HDR. That is the question.


discreetphoton Plus
16 3.5k 20 United Kingdom
16 Feb 2010 2:31PM
Don't forget meters, and autofocus, Ade Smile And cameras, those are just a lazy way of painting, right?
smackmyfish 11 82
16 Feb 2010 2:38PM
tripods are cheating, God gave you hands and fingers and legs and feet
fraser 17 631 14 Scotland
16 Feb 2010 3:44PM
If the purpose of photography was simply to record what is in front of the camera in pure unadulterated detail the world would be a boring place indeed and photography would be nothing more than craft.
Show me a painting by a Dutch master and I'll show you an HDR image.
Eviscera 15 1.1k 149 United Kingdom
16 Feb 2010 4:20PM
Well said Fraser , Im sure not being able to paint (use the tools) is part of the "purists" angst sometimes.
RogBrown 14 3.1k 10 England
16 Feb 2010 5:52PM
This whole argument has been running since the dawn of photography & will continue to do so for ever! Still, it's better than click threads. Which reminds me - why do some crap pics get more clicks than mine! Smile
Eviscera 15 1.1k 149 United Kingdom
16 Feb 2010 5:57PM
You don't do Robins or Pub signs or Blue Tits or squirrels in hdr Rog Wink
RogBrown 14 3.1k 10 England
16 Feb 2010 6:06PM

Quote:You don't do Robins or Pub signs or Blue Tits or squirrels in hdr Rog Wink

Ah. Now I understand. Wink
sherring 13 46 13 United Kingdom
16 Feb 2010 6:10PM
I wonder if the purists bitch about B&W pics. As far as I know, knowbody sees the world in black and White so that also must be cheating. Wink
Geoffphoto 15 13.5k United Kingdom
16 Feb 2010 6:13PM

Quote:As far as I know, knowbody sees the world in black and White so that also must be cheating.



I do, !! Grin (But then again I'm colour-blind !! )
Kot 12 7 1 Poland
16 Feb 2010 10:24PM
As I noticed some guys think that HDR is a kind of shortcut - easy and effortless way:

Quote:Perhaps the comment was not put across in the correct way for you, but they do have a point in as much as balancing the exposure etc. yourself is much more satisfying than taking taking a series of shots at different exposures and letting the software sort it out.

What can I say? I sometimes try to use HDR soft (Photomatix) but effects are rather poor so I don't show them to anybody. Simple lack of experience in using software. I also tried "handmade" HDR by blending different exposures with advanced masking in Photoshop - much better final effect but it's such bloody arduous and time-consuming work. I'm afraid I'm too lazy for thatWink
"Letting the software sort it out"? FORGET IT.
ade_mcfade 17 15.2k 216 England
16 Feb 2010 10:36PM
I don't think anyone would use HDR commercially, or probablly has a hobby, if they didn't need to

It's actually far more work for both you and the camera to start dicking around taking lots more photos, killing your shutter's life span, taking up more card space, then more space on your hard drive, then having to create the HDR file, then tone map the HDR, then process the TIFF that produces...

HDR is a f**k of a lot more work than 1 shot

it's the hard way out - not the easy way out.

you use it because your camera cannot capture the scene... and ND grads are not suitable.

whoever thinks taking a spot meter reading or 2 and using grads to balance the exposure is actually "easier" than HDR is deranged.

anyone who's learned how a meter works can do the former and get the results they're after, that's very very easy indeed.
lobsterboy Plus
17 14.9k 13 United Kingdom
16 Feb 2010 10:50PM

Quote:
HDR is a f**k of a lot more work than 1 shot

it's the hard way out - not the easy way out.



Thats the main reason I've never bothered with it...allergic to hard work.
ade_mcfade 17 15.2k 216 England
16 Feb 2010 11:44PM

Quote:
Thats the main reason I've never bothered with it...allergic to hard work.



lol - best way Smile

just does my head in when people call HDR "easy" or cheating, when it's neither Smile
rgarrigus 13 25 7 England
21 Feb 2010 9:26AM
Blanket condemnation of technique always intrigues me. Personally, I don't think photography (or any form of art) was ever intended simply to be about displaying the limitations of your medium in 2 dimensions. As technology advances we now have at our disposal a plethora of useful tools that help us really bring out the best in 2 dimensional image capture. We can make photographs of subjects in light conditions that artists would never have been able to achieve twenty, perhaps even ten years ago. HDR, exposure stitching, focus-stacking, live view, auto focus, perspective and distortion correction and whatever miraculous invention tomorrows news brings are all nothing more than tools in the creative toolbox. For me, in a photograph I enjoy, the end always justifies the means (provided the means don't overpower the end). Embrace technology and use it (or don't) in whatever manner you want to achieve your own artistic statement. There is no such thing as "cheating" in art. (Honesty in journalism is another matter entirely and not where my photographic interests rest.)

A tea sounds really good right about now...
collywobles 17 4.1k 10 United Kingdom
21 Feb 2010 10:17AM
Well said Bob.

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.