What is your opinion of HDR photographs

POAH said:
I don't have aproblem with HDR so long as people don't claim they are photographs. HDR can produce some intense images but 95% of the ones you see are crap, bit like rig shots in automotive work lol
Click to expand...

I know I said I left but I just can't let that go (I know I shouldn't bite but I will) Of course they are photographs a photo ois defined thus

"A photograph (often shortened to photo) is an image created by light falling on a light-sensitive surface, usually photographic film or an electronic imager such as a CCD or a CMOS chip." - (From Wikipedia)

HDR/Tone Mapping is just a way of processing this origional capture(s), I could blend those images together in photoshop or I could blend the film exposures in the dark room would those results be classed as photographs or not under your crazy idea.

I have no problem with opinions but your statement is just ridiculous and if you not just trolling to get a response then I pity you, hell either way I pity you.
 
bakedbeans said:
If you can't take other people's opinions, why bother to post your pictures? I think that most of your images do look fake and straight out of a video game (now, there they would like awesome).
Click to expand...

I would love to see a video game with graphics like that! Maybe in 20 years time. His photos look like photos. He is a photographer, he uses his camera to excellent effect, and the results show. He is full time self employed, has a new book under his belt with more to come, and has various commissions. Clearly, he is doing something right :)

Gary.
 
To say they arent photos is plain stupid, B&W aren't then because I see colour out my eyes!

I think some of this comes down to different generations of photographer, also people who have tried HDR, done badly, given up and now don't like it.
 
I can take it just fine. I don't like the words they are using to describe what I believe to be a great bit of technology. Don't start making this debate personal.
 
Wow, I've not looked in much on the forums for a few months and the old HDR topic is up for debate again. Seems to be on a bi-monthly loop or something :)

I really don't get all the hoo-hah. HDR done well can produce brilliant images. Full stop.

I'm no HDR expert at all, but have dabbled and really liked the results on occasion.

And just to wade in with some of the 'technical' debate, has anyone mentioned that a digital sensor doesn't actually capture the same dynamic range of light compared to the human eye/ brain. A digital 'snapshot' often looks nothing like the scene you saw with your eyes, and subtle use of HDR can actually fill in the gaps thereby producing a more 'natural' looking shot.

Note I did say: subtle.
 
EdinburghGary said:
I would love to see a video game with graphics like that! Maybe in 20 years time. His photos look like photos. He is a photographer, he uses his camera to excellent effect, and the results show. He is full time self employed, has a new book under his belt with more to come, and has various commissions. Clearly, he is doing something right :)

Gary.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I would even buy a game console if games with good story and that particular look would be released.

Not sure why you're quoting me and replying about Pete a photographer. Never said he's a cook or a builder, did I? And just because you make money out of something doesn't mean it's right, it just means it's commercially successive.
 
... If its not silver halide its witchcraft I tell ya!!! :eek: :D

I mean come on, its all manipulation of light inevitably which ever way you choose, none of its real...its all fake, digital, film, or others... but it is, all still photography nonetheless.

HDR's no more fake or real than all the others, flash fill, ND grads, blurred pans, rear sync flash, black and white, NIGHT shots, WB, steaming lights, studio lighting, etc etc.... the human eye doesn't see the world like any of those scenes, it doesn't even see an in focus scene, apart from the spot your looking at, everything else in the real world is oof.

Photography is just our way of capturing what we see as best we can, its very effective isn’t it... to me HDR is an advancement of that quest, nothing more but certainly nothing less.
 
petemc said:
I can take it just fine. I don't like the words they are using to describe what I believe to be a great bit of technology. Don't start making this debate personal.
Click to expand...

Sounded different in your "kick in the balls". No one is attacking you, I only criticized your work/use of HDR. Again, if you can't take it, don't post it. Nothing personal.

Anyway, I'm outta here :)
 
lukewoodford said:
To say they arent photos is plain stupid, B&W aren't then because I see colour out my eyes!

I think some of this comes down to different generations of photographer, also people who have tried HDR, done badly, given up and now don't like it.
Click to expand...

black and white are colours IIRC :thinking:
 
POAH said:
black and white are colours IIRC :thinking:
Click to expand...

Now you really are being deliberatly obtuse, the point being made is obvious and your just choosing to make a daft comment rather than anything constructive, please stop your trolling.
 
lukewoodford said:
My point is people don't like it because its fake however anything that is slightly processed is fake. Anyway I agree this thread is like a roundabout. :)
Click to expand...

I don't have aproblem with fake

this is fake (HDR)

2695474842_9ccacf782b.jpg
 
a1ex2001 said:
Now you really are being deliberatly obtuse, the point being made is obvious and your just choosing to make a daft comment rather than anything constructive, please stop your trolling.
Click to expand...

no I'm not. the poster said B&W was not colour when in fact it is but just made up of two
 
Forbiddenbiker said:
Hi Chris

Infact a true HDR is made from 3 different exposures, covering a larger dynamic range all in together.... so in fact it's derived in camera, and assembled if you like, in the processing room.

Just like film. ;):thumbs:
Click to expand...



yes i was aware of that and yes a fair point.
 
:bang::bang::bang::bang:

It's a processing technique folks, the sooner people stop saying look at this HDR image and just post the image the sooner we can get on with enjoying our hobby / profession.

I really couldn't give a damn how the photographer manipulated the scene to achieve the desired outcome, if it's a good image it's a good image. If it's not then it's not.

Oh and Black isn't a colour, something is black when it absorbs all the available colours of the spectrum and therefore reflects none of them back. White isn't technically a colour either it is a mixture of all seven colours of the spectrum... but I'm being very picky here so please don't lets start down that road.... that's one the physicists amongst you can deabte on another forum.;)
 
maddog.mark said:
:bang::bang::bang::bang:

It's a processing technique folks, the sooner people stop saying look at this HDR image and just post the image the sooner we can get on with enjoying our hobby / profession.

I really couldn't give a damn how the photographer manipulated the scene to achieve the desired outcome, if it's a good image it's a good image. If it's not then it's not.
Click to expand...

Hallelujah and amen to that!:thumbs:
 
bakedbeans said:
Sounded different in your "kick in the balls". No one is attacking you, I only criticized your work/use of HDR. Again, if you can't take it, don't post it. Nothing personal.

Anyway, I'm outta here :)
Click to expand...

Hah. You think if I couldn't take it I wouldn't still be here after nearly 4 years?:p I only defended my work. If someone said your work was disgusting you would defend it. Bit different to constructive criticism.
 
I hate 95% of them as they are complete **** - the ones in this thread arent bad *** and here's one of mine which I dont think it over done.

evopic.jpg
 
*stands by the door, twirling big bunch of thread keys and looking irritated*
 
Sorry if this has been covered in the last 5 pages, and I know i'm abit late coming to the table, but what I dont get about HDR is that if it cant be displayed on your average monitor, what is the point of it? Is it not just exposure blending with a bad name and reputation?
 
*twirls pompoms at matty* pwease keep it open :)

Can't we just ban bad photographers? Over exposed photos are worse and easier to do than hdr. Ban cameras! Look what they do to photos. ;)
 
as long as people keep it civil it will stay open.
 
68lbs said:
Sorry if this has been covered in the last 5 pages, and I know i'm abit late coming to the table, but what I dont get about HDR is that if it cant be displayed on your average monitor, what is the point of it? Is it not just exposure blending with a bad name and reputation?
Click to expand...

see this is the problem. People don't know what it actually is.
 
That's why we love you so much Pete. You're the HDR daddy, and can educate us without making us feel crap and stoopid :D
 
haha. Suckle daddys hdr teet. I'm on a shoot at the mo so I can't get into detail on it. Read my guide. There is some info there or wait till my hdr book is out. How to cook hdr's by HDRman. ;)
 
I've played with HDR (read Pete's and other sites and I think I have an ok understanding of the process) and my issue is always understanding what would make a good HDR shot, most of mine are crap btw. The only one I knew in advance, and specifically planned for, would require HDR to get the effect I wanted was to capture details in the moon and the refraction patterns of the light from the moon in the clouds around it. The camera cannot capture that in a single exposure with no filters (I don't have any that could get it). Personally I like the result and I think it worked ok.
 
Black and white, are not colours strictly speaking. Black is an absence of colour and white is a mixture of all the colours in the visible spectrum. Common usage of the terms, plus the tins of Dulux brilliant white paint in B&Q, would suggest a more relaxed interpretation however.

Whilst the finished product may obscure the fact, any image that starts life in a camera is a photograph. Because it is created by the action of light on a sensitive medium. And all photographs are to some degree processed: raw data from a sensor or undeveloped film stock both appear blank to our eyes.

HDR/tone-mapping is just another processing technique. Used and abused as are all other techniques. I find that many 'HDR' pictures, to my eyes, appear gaudy and unpleasant. There again, the fashion for 'Draganized' pictures are again,to my eyes, equally unpleasant. I think with rare exceptions over-processing diminishes rather than enhances an image. Just look at the 'glamour' processes used in many/most magazines.

Nevertheless, any technique can be used to tell a story, to dramatise a view. The church interior picture referred to above shows how a restrained use of a processing technique can be used to advantage to present a particular 'story'. But even with that subject, there are an infinite number of interpretations that could have been used to tell an infinite number of stories.

Anthony.
 
I tend to use HDR to bring out detail in the sky and try not to over process and keep it as natural as is possible with an HDR photograph.
Thank you for all your thoughts on HDR photography.
 
I am not a fan of The Red Hot Chilli Peppers, the tunes, the look, pretty much everything about the chilli's is not my cuppa. Nope, not a smidge.
I cringe whenever I hear a Chilli's tune and immediately want it to end as fast as possible. I am relieved when it is so.

If I were to say that the Chilli's aren't musicians, aren't a band, don't make music, can't make music, don't know anything about making music I would be being just plain silly.

Truth is:

Millions of folk love em, they are indeed very successful musicians, they are talented, they play to hundreds of thousands at a single gig. They're minted, and most of them are quite sensible, family kinda blokes.

But I really don't like the music.

But....

I think it's an easy and very regular of us humans to condemn and de-value the things we don't like a little too easily. "Nah I don't like that it's poo!", "How anyone can like that is beyond me!!", "That Jimmy Hendrix can't play for toffee!" That HDR stuff is worthless cak!", "That Dave Hill k*****r ain't no photographer" :| blah blah etc

The truth is, alot of the things we don't like are accepted, valuable, significant, and successful.
Voicing your opinion is just fine but you really can't change anything by attempting to condemn and disregard it, it does you no favours at all.
Just because it's not within your preferences or in your favours does not mean it is not viable or valuable. :naughty:
You can however be free to hate but be honest with yourself at least in the process.

I've had too much coffee again haven't I? Maybe I should of had some beer instead? :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top