HDR Bashing

Well they can bash me all they want, HDR photography is new to me and I think its a wonderfull part of the photography hobbie, I am totally facinated by it
 
Lesco said:
Well they can bash me all they want, HDR photography is new to me and I think its a wonderfull part of the photography hobbie, I am totally facinated by it
Click to expand...
I echo this fully. Im new and have to admit HDR was one of the main reasons i bought my camera along with long exposure stuff. Ive seen photos from a guy called Artie on Flickr and they are astounding to me.....have a look.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artiephotography/sets/72157605103119650/
Phil
 
HDR is not photography - its image generation

Lesco said:
Well they can bash me all they want, HDR photography is new to me and I think its a wonderfull part of the photography hobbie, I am totally facinated by it
Click to expand...
 
Here we go... see, I told you. It is only ever photographers who I have seen who are the ones to say HDR IS this or HDR IS that...

Sorry POAH, in my opinion, you're talking utter gibberish.
 
fastworldimages said:
Its a bit like selective colour images, when you see so many pics of 1 persons t shirt the only thing colour you wonder if people actually are able to do anything 'different' and a bit more challenging.
Click to expand...
I might think that about a lot of tedious images (urban decay, garden birds, the beach at sunset and many more clichés) but don't say so. If the photographer is happy with the result then the photograph is a success.

Pretty much the only time I'll comment on a picture on here is when someone tries to use it to define a point I'm discussing.
 
Last edited:
Voyager said:
What is photography if not image generation? :suspect:
Click to expand...

camera takes the photograph HDR makes a digital image not a photograph. I have no problem with HDR, most of it looks rubbish IMHO but there are a few nice ones out there.
 
theMusicMan said:
Here we go... see, I told you. It is only ever photographers who I have seen who are the ones to say HDR IS this or HDR IS that...

Sorry POAH, in my opinion, you're talking utter gibberish.
Click to expand...

yeah image a photographer having an opinion on an image :cuckoo:

I would have thought the reason that only photographers tend to have an opinion on the HDR process is because only photographers use it but hey what do I know I take gibberish :shrug:

I've never used HDR to take a photograph before - I've used it to create a digital image that is not even remotely like the scene I photographed with my camera.
 
Oh come on guys... we're going round in circles.
HDR is a technique and the end result is that you get an image of something or other. If you want to call it a photograph or you don't want to call it a photograph is irrelevant.

Sometimes it works well at other times it's a disaster. A bit like photography really :)

cheers
 
Bill Roberts said:
Oh come on guys... we're going round in circles.
HDR is a technique and the end result is that you get an image of something or other. If you want to call it a photograph or you don't want to call it a photograph is irrelevant.

Sometimes it works well at other times it's a disaster. A bit like photography really :)

cheers
Click to expand...

Spot on Bill :thumbs:

Has anyone used HDR to take photos of the moon so you can have a nicely exposed moon and see surrounding clouds so the moon isn't blown out or the sky isn't black?
 
Voyager said:
theMusicMan is right, you're talking utter gibberish. :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

I'm only basing my replys on what people have posted before - if you are telling me the 5D2 does not take make a photograph then its not a camera is it.
 
fabs said:
Please folks. Given the new era we are entering into on here, can we keep things civil and certainly refrain from calling someone's opinion 'gibberish'.

Thank you
Click to expand...
OK. But how would you like it to be portrayed, Fabs? if my opinion that someones opinion is gibberish how do I portray that. i wasn't saying a person was gibberish, I was offering my opinion that a persons opinion was gibberish.

Sometimes people don't agree with other peoples opinions... but are you saying we're not allowed to disagree with others opinions now...? is that the new era...? :bang:
 
theMusicMan said:
OK. But how would you like it to be portrayed, Fabs? if my opinion that someones opinion is gibberish how do I portray that. i wasn't saying a person was gibberish, I was offering my opinion that a persons opinion was gibberish.

Sometimes people don't agree with other peoples opinions... but are you saying we're not allowed to disagree with others opinions now...? is that the new era...? :bang:
Click to expand...

Saying that you disagree with someone's opinion is fine. Saying why you disagree with that opinion is fine. Using the term 'gibberish' is rather condescending and unnecessary though.
 
POAH said:
I'm only basing my replys on what people have posted before - if you are telling me the 5D2 does not take make a photograph then its not a camera is it.
Click to expand...

Staff edit: Rude comment removed

Your camera records an image digitally, this image is then processed (again digitally) and it the final result when displayed (digitally) on a screen or printed that it becomes what people recognise as a 'photograph'. You may not do much to it or you might fiddle for hours with a digital darkroom process, but it is the end result that is the photograph and not the data on the memory card - and all that process requires 'image generation' not just creating HDR images.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fabs said:
Saying that you disagree with someone's opinion is fine. Saying why you disagree with that opinion is fine. Using the term 'gibberish' is rather condescending and unnecessary though.
Click to expand...
It's a fine line on Talk Photography that seems to depend on how stupid the moderator is rather than what is actually posted.

'Bye *******.
 
Never shot a HDR image before but I do like it when I see it, even the over-the-top stuff, I think it's ace!
 
hmmm I would say a camera takes a photograph, irrespective of whether its digitally saved or not, its still a camera. the digital manipulation comes after the fact that a photograph has been taken. Post processing comes into it after the photograph is taken, a point and shoot does some post processing to sharpen the image, while a dslr doesnt if you dont ask it to, some people find its half the fun doing the processing.
 
fabs said:
Saying that you disagree with someone's opinion is fine. Saying why you disagree with that opinion is fine. Using the term 'gibberish' is rather condescending and unnecessary though.
Click to expand...
Fair point, I can see how some readers might have interpreted it that way, Fabs.

Certainly wasn't meant in that manner, and the problem online though, is that I guess I am not able to post it in the way that I say it - which is just an off the cuff type "phah, naah, you're talking gibberish". Not condescending when said, only interpreted as such by some when read.

.... :)
 
Heres a few from the guy on Flickr i mentioned...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artiephotography/3341272834/in/set-72157605103119650/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artiephotography/3155074472/in/set-72157605103119650/


Arent there times where it would beneficial for every photographer to use this method to capture all of the detail in a given scene say for example a nice staircase with lots of setail but a doorway at the bottom which is blown out. Obviously you can still have the photo looking natural if you didnt like the types discussed here. As i said im new to photography and am interested in this discussion.
Theres a good example of such a scene here.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm
Phil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top