Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Is this the HDR you all hate?  (Read 5074 times)
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 270


« on: May 25, 2013, 11:51:26 AM »
ReplyReply

I use HDR all the time but going for the natural effect, not pushing things or opening up the shadows too much. I rarely go for the wild effect but this image screamed at me 'do it! do it!'.

I rather like the effect. It made a very nice print.

The car belongs to a local farmer, somewhat of a character. It is not a daily driver but gets out weekly. We see it around these parts frequently.

Panasonic GH3, 12-35 2.8 at 35. ISO 200. Photomatix, PS, and LR. 

Larry
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2225



WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2013, 01:00:29 PM »
ReplyReply

No, more like this Smiley

Logged

Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1439


« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2013, 01:36:02 PM »
ReplyReply

The OP's image is fine. The yellow car is bloody awful
Logged
PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1791



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 25, 2013, 01:43:26 PM »
ReplyReply

 No, that is skillful and appropriate HDR. In fact, I would not have guessed HDR if you had not mentioned it.
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 270


« Reply #4 on: May 25, 2013, 02:01:13 PM »
ReplyReply

kaelaria

No. The car is too new. javascript:void(0);

PeterAit

To which image are you referring? The yellow car, to me, is obviously HDR - slight halos and overall tonality.

Larry
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 765



« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2013, 02:28:13 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm not a fan of the kind of HDR represented by the VW photo in this thread, but your photo is fine. I don't hate extreme HDR anyway. My issue with it is similar to the one I have with many digi-era techniques: their ease of application and their ubiquity turn them into gimmicks.

It's ironic that I've become attracted to a more straight-from-the-camera approach at a time when almost anything is possible post-processing-wise. The goal is to move past gimmicks & over-conceptualizing towards a kind of photography that better respects the observed moment. Less Wall & Sherman and more Winogrand.   Wink

-Dave-
Logged
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 270


« Reply #6 on: May 25, 2013, 03:13:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Telecaster

I agree with the ubiquity aspect of digital processing. But since I am in the middle of the cornfields of Central Illinois and the folks around here are generally not photo sophisticated, it's new to them.

As I said previously, I generally go for the more natural look so this was a departure for me.

Larry
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7790



WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 25, 2013, 03:26:35 PM »
ReplyReply

The OP's image is fine. The yellow car is bloody awful
+1.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #8 on: May 25, 2013, 05:21:21 PM »
ReplyReply

In the first it's very obvious that some form of strong local contrast has been applied.  Whether it's HDR or a plugin like Topaz it's quite obvious.  But it suits the subject.  That's the point. If the processing suits the subject, it works.  This type of strong local contrast wouldn't suit other subject matter.

In the second, any processing; HDR or otherwise, that induces halos is bad processing.
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


« Reply #9 on: May 25, 2013, 05:33:03 PM »
ReplyReply

In the first it's very obvious that some form of strong local contrast has been applied.  Whether it's HDR or a plugin like Topaz it's quite obvious.  But it suits the subject.  That's the point. If the processing suits the subject, it works.  This type of strong local contrast wouldn't suit other subject matter.

In the second, any processing; HDR or otherwise, that induces halos is bad processing.
Yes, I agree.
This is a common sense approach to post-processing.
(Not much different, in principle to applying in-camera techniques.)

Tony Jay
Logged
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5698



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 25, 2013, 08:23:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Well done, Larry. Thanks for sharing it!

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5536



WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 26, 2013, 12:48:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Excellent processing; quite appropriate for the subject.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
mac_paolo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419


« Reply #12 on: May 26, 2013, 01:41:48 AM »
ReplyReply

HDR is a status, not a technique.
I think the way you approached that is perfectly acceptable and good looking.
Nice shot!
Logged
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 394



WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 26, 2013, 10:50:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Larry I think your image is great, well done and very good use of HDR, the second post of the VW is pretty bad.
In the end it is what fits your vision, everything else is just noise and opinion, if you are happy it really does not matter what others think.  Grin

Alan
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 10:51:47 AM by snoleoprd » Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
leuallen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 270


« Reply #14 on: May 26, 2013, 11:02:30 AM »
ReplyReply

For historical purposes here is the same car about 2 years ago after hitting a deer. The grill has since been replaced and some front end work done. You can't see it clearly but there is lettering on the recent image just behind the right turn lamp: Barncar = 1 Deer =0.

Larry
Logged
Roman Racela
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



« Reply #15 on: May 26, 2013, 05:28:53 PM »
ReplyReply

It looks fine to me, Larry. You did just enough I think.

But the yellow Beetle looks horrible.


I use HDR all the time but going for the natural effect, not pushing things or opening up the shadows too much. I rarely go for the wild effect but this image screamed at me 'do it! do it!'.

I rather like the effect. It made a very nice print.

The car belongs to a local farmer, somewhat of a character. It is not a daily driver but gets out weekly. We see it around these parts frequently.

Panasonic GH3, 12-35 2.8 at 35. ISO 200. Photomatix, PS, and LR. 

Larry
Logged
slothead
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61



« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2013, 09:45:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I think there is a time and place for both methods.  I prefer the first image by the OP, but I can see the attraction of the beetle in some situations.  It certainly is an attention grabber (valuable in advertising) and unrealistic but characteristic of an acrylic or oil painting.  I've heard (the uneducated, IMHO) describe a photograph they find attractive because they say "it looks like a painting!"  So to each his own, and the best image for the job.

Thanks all,
Logged

Tom
Nikon D800, Oly OM-D E-M5, Oly E-P2IR
and an assortment of lenses, adapters and tripods
iluvmycam
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 302


WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 29, 2013, 12:53:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I love HDR is all forms pretty much. If it works, it is fine. If it does not work then I wont use it.
Logged
duane_bolland
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 30, 2013, 12:52:51 PM »
ReplyReply

The OP's image is fine. The yellow car is bloody awful
+2
Logged
kayakfari
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18



WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 01, 2013, 01:10:51 PM »
ReplyReply

The consensus is clear! IMHO the best HDR is the one you can't really tell was redone ..
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad