ummmmm confussed !!!

bonsyde

bonsyde

Suspended / Banned
Messages
249
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
ok here goes..... everywhere i look just now i see HDR images, and i must admit i think most of them look great... so i decided to see how its done... so ... now i understand, please correct me if im wrong but its 3 images, 1 under exposed, 1 pretty ok and 1 over exposed... then all put together in the pc and out comes a good image.... so here is my question !!!! is this good photography ? or is it good pc work.... we start out with a duff picture & it ends up coming out great.....see why im confused !!!!!:bonk::bonk:
 
Thats because you've got it very wrong there. You should never start out with a "duff" picture or you'll end up with a processed duff picture. HDR isn't about turning rubbish into gold. Its about taking something good and polishing it. Is it good computer work, yes. Just as it was good darkroom work back in the day. Its still photography.
 
A duff pic will always be a duff pic - so you need a potential for a great shot in the first place

Sometimes though, the dynamic range of the subject is simply too great to record properly and hence a HDR approach may make an image where one could not be done so well otherwise

You can't, and it doesn't, polish the proverbial turd !!!

DD
 
You need to understand why HDR is used. When you have a subject who's dynamiv range is to great to be recorded by a single frome, you record different section of the dynamic range on different exposures. Don't limit it to 3 frames, some that I have done are 5 or 7.

The HDR process converts these to a single 32 bit image, which you can then adjust to get it into a range you can reproduce. It's like taking the best bits from each image. . Ideally you need to work in RAW format as that gives the HDR software the greatest dynamic range from each frame.

The idea is not to take duff images and make a good one, it's al about vision. You see something, like a sunset, with an interesting foreground. You can't record all the detail in one go so you record it in "sections" It's then combined to produce that great shot you saw in the first place.
 
ummm i think im starting to get it ... so do you start out planning to take three pictures with the aim of HDR in mind ???? i think i got it VERY wrong until now ( not really understaning it ) i was thinking it was kinda like a quick fix tool for a bad picture...
 
or more pictures if you think you need it.... thanks chappers i really am starting to understand it ....
 
There are no quick fixes for a bad photo. There are fixes for a good photo with a few issues but the more you try and polish a turd the more **** you get on your hands.
 
bonsyde said:
... so do you start out planning to take three pictures with the aim of HDR in mind ????
Click to expand...

Exactly, you see a shot that needs the HDR (Tone Mapping for Pete's sake :D) approach, then shoot as many images as needed to capture the range (as Chappers said)

It's not really a rescue tool - though sometimes it can help

DD
 
thanks guys, i really have learned something new just now.... what would we do without you all .....
 
bonsyde said:
thanks guys, i really have learned something new just now.... what would we do without you all .....
Click to expand...
You'd be polishing turds and getting s**t on your hands. :D
 
i think i got it VERY wrong until now ( not really understaning it ) i was thinking it was kinda like a quick fix tool for a bad picture...
Click to expand...


You're right that's not what it should be. You're also right that that's often how it's used. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top