June 19, 2018, 10:14:48 PM

Author Topic: My kind of HDR  (Read 64065 times)

Mr_Canuck

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 216
(Not) My kind of HDR
« Reply #30 on: September 03, 2014, 02:18:53 AM »
I like your compositions, your subjects and your enthusiasm. They are good shots. But the "HDR" treatment (like so very many shots these days) doesn't appeal to me whatsoever. They feel like they are glowing neon. I particularly can't stand overcooked HDR skies that look like bad black velvet paintings as has been noted. Yours are better than many but it still doesn't float my boat.

I actually think a lot of this isn't simply much a matter one's taste, but the fact that HDR modes are in such rampant overuse that it just screams "I clicked a button and used a certain filter or feature" and hoozah, here it is. No question, it's a fad. But I'm even seeing its overuse in journalism including mags like National Geographic. And I cringe. I hope we all don't get used to it as being acceptable particularly in such contexts.

I feel free to rant here because you've got good initial photos, and I can also compliment you on them whilst hating on the HDR technology.  ;)

I think if you looked at ways to still do punchy or even playful colour treatments and contrast, along with some careful dodging to get the brightness out of shadows, they could really be interesting and appealing. Seems all the info is there in the file and the essence is there in your exposure and composition and subjects.
6D | Voigt 20 | 24-70/4 | 40STM | 50/2.5M | 70-200/4is | 100/2.8L | EX270 | EX420 | ST-E2 | Velbon ultra lux iL | RX100

canon rumors FORUM

(Not) My kind of HDR
« Reply #30 on: September 03, 2014, 02:18:53 AM »

infared

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1397
  • Kodak Brownie!
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #31 on: September 03, 2014, 05:21:49 AM »
I HDR most of my images, but I use the tech to bring out the visual beauty in the scenes not turn it into a bad velvet painting  ::).....but it has already been said "to each their own".

I enjoyed these.  Subtle but clear examples of the occasional benefit of HDR processing.

Thanks J
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 06:03:47 AM by infared »
5D III +BG, 5D IV +BG, Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, Rokinon 15mm f/2.4,  Canon 17mm f/4L TS-E, Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS, Sigma 20mm f/1.4 Art, Canon 35mm f/1.4L II, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art, Canon 85mm f/1.2L,  Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II & 1.4x III

Akrobatiks

  • Canonflex
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #32 on: September 03, 2014, 07:27:56 AM »
I think a few of the pics in here look to processed. I see halos in a few of them and they need some more contrast. A lot of people forget that you need contrast to maintain that pop and prevent it from looking to flat. I prefer to go for a more natural look with my HDR photos... Here's a few example for you guys... All of these are multiple exposure blends which were done manually in Photoshop without the use of HDR software.

Hope you enjoy!!

www.jamielinkphotography.com
























« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 07:32:08 AM by Akrobatiks »

Click

  • Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L
  • ************
  • Posts: 10465
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #33 on: September 03, 2014, 07:47:52 AM »
Very nice HDR Akrobatiks

Welcome to CR 

Arthur_Nunes

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #34 on: September 03, 2014, 07:55:25 AM »
I like to make HDR halfway between natural and surreal


Hand Held Canon 6D + 24-105L @ISO 1000
6D | 24-105L | 50mm 1.8 II | 580EX II | YN 568EX II | 622C | Pixel Mago | 622C-TX

jwilbern

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 142
  • EOS 60D, G5X
    • My Flickr
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #35 on: September 03, 2014, 08:49:00 AM »
I like to have a couple of the original exposures visible in the corner of the screen while doing HDR work. It helps me to keep it "real enough."
EOS 60D, S90

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6316
  • Canon Pride.
    • Der Tierfotograf
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #36 on: September 03, 2014, 09:19:09 AM »
First off: I'm guilty of producing these legacy "one click" hdr shots, too - and if I look at them now my eyes hurt. That's why I always keep the source files around in case my taste changes once again in the future.

I like to make HDR halfway between natural and surreal

In my recent hdr experience, often you don't have a choice: At least my eye *knows* that you cannot see the sun and deep shadows all in one scene at the same time, so it always looks somewhat artificial. You surely can avoid oversaturated colors though.

Imho most scenes would look better w/o real hdr toning at all, but with simple exposure fusion (i.e. replacing a whole bright window content with a darker exposure) because it prevents you running into these horrible histogram inversions seen above. This is no option with hdr gradients, in these cases I'd vote for KISS w/o too many local corrections, but non-linear curve pulling extreme shadows and highlights into the middle but little else.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #36 on: September 03, 2014, 09:19:09 AM »

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2014, 10:35:05 AM »
I think HDR is a personal thing (either you like it or you don't), and this applies to how little or how much HDR processing you use, i.e. realistic or totally artistic.  In the end, though, it's a bit like like putting fancy sauce on a steak - if the meat is good, it can add or change the flavor, but if the meat sucks, it still sucks. 

I'm not a big fan of the over the top HDR look, but as Scott Kelby will tell you:

"While many of these photographers don’t like HDR images at all…non-photographers absolutely love them!"

One of the people that seems to get the overcooked HDR right is RC Concepcion.  I don't like all of his stuff, but he's a good photographer underneath it all and seems to use HDR to enhance his work.



CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

Besisika

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 614
  • How can you stand out, if you do like evrybdy else
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #38 on: September 03, 2014, 10:48:30 AM »
Here is another done about the same time frame...one of my favorites..Again in print its amazing as well..this is how I saw the scene in my head before I shot it...going with a more "Natural" look woud have not done it justice in my opinion..


Technically speaking, and not to be callous, but this isn't HDR. It is actually the result of improper tonemapping during conversion from HDR (which in the truest sense is an image that stores 32-bit floating point values for each RGB subpixel) to a lower integer bit depth (such as 16-bit or 8-bit). It is the use of high precision 32-bit floating point numbers that makes things "high" dynamic range.

Eeha! Is that actually the English of this planet? Most probably true, but what does it mean? It reminds me the guy in the film "battleship" who said "who talks like that?"
Indeed, some photographers are technicalists and some artists - no offense intended, forgive me if I had.
I am not into HDR or whatever it is called, but it is nice from time to time to live in someone else's world even for a moment. Relaxing me doing so.
Please post some more for me to watch when tired, who knows maybe I will try someday, good to know how you achieved it.

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2014, 10:56:54 AM »
I had to do it - looks like there is no definition of HDR so all of you are right and all of you are wrong:
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5319
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #40 on: September 03, 2014, 11:26:33 AM »
I had to do it - looks like there is no definition of HDR so all of you are right and all of you are wrong:

That would be because HDR is not a word, it's an acronym. An initialism, to be more precise.

HDR = High Dynamic Range

From a technical standpoint, 16-bit and 8-bit images don't contain enough data space to truly qualify for the HDR moniker. They are what we call LDR or Low Dynamic Range files. A true HDR image is one stored in a file format that has an extremely large data space. Something like a 32-bit float TIFF, which contains a MASSIVE data space that can represent brightness values from something say as tiny/dark as 0.000001 to something as large/bright as say 100000000.

When we merge to HDR, we usually merge multiple source exposures that represent more total tonal range than is possible to record in a single 16-bit file, then save the merged result to a 32-bit Float TIFF. From there, we either downconvert with an algorithm (i.e. local adaptation) or manually tonemap the wide dynamic range of the HDR into the narrower dynamic range of a 16-bit or 8-bit image for publication online.

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4016
  • Master of Pain
    • My Personal Work
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #41 on: September 03, 2014, 11:38:05 AM »
I had to do it - looks like there is no definition of HDR so all of you are right and all of you are wrong:

That would be because HDR is not a word, it's an acronym. An initialism, to be more precise.

HDR = High Dynamic Range

From a technical standpoint, 16-bit and 8-bit images don't contain enough data space to truly qualify for the HDR moniker. They are what we call LDR or Low Dynamic Range files. A true HDR image is one stored in a file format that has an extremely large data space. Something like a 32-bit float TIFF, which contains a MASSIVE data space that can represent brightness values from something say as tiny/dark as 0.000001 to something as large/bright as say 100000000.

When we merge to HDR, we usually merge multiple source exposures that represent more total tonal range than is possible to record in a single 16-bit file, then save the merged result to a 32-bit Float TIFF. From there, we either downconvert with an algorithm (i.e. local adaptation) or manually tonemap the wide dynamic range of the HDR into the narrower dynamic range of a 16-bit or 8-bit image for publication online.
I know, I'm just messing with you guys but beyond the technical description of what high dynamic range files actually are, there is a lot of interpretation about what "HDR" means in terms of the look of the final photo.  I've seen plenty of HDR-looking files that have very little dynamic range and are just Photoshopped to hell.  Like a lot of things, HDR and the meaning of it has taken on a life of its own.
CPS Score: 111 points, those 0 and 1 point items really add up

Besisika

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 614
  • How can you stand out, if you do like evrybdy else
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #42 on: September 03, 2014, 11:43:02 AM »
I had to do it - looks like there is no definition of HDR so all of you are right and all of you are wrong:

That would be because HDR is not a word, it's an acronym. An initialism, to be more precise.

HDR = High Dynamic Range

From a technical standpoint, 16-bit and 8-bit images don't contain enough data space to truly qualify for the HDR moniker. They are what we call LDR or Low Dynamic Range files. A true HDR image is one stored in a file format that has an extremely large data space. Something like a 32-bit float TIFF, which contains a MASSIVE data space that can represent brightness values from something say as tiny/dark as 0.000001 to something as large/bright as say 100000000.

When we merge to HDR, we usually merge multiple source exposures that represent more total tonal range than is possible to record in a single 16-bit file, then save the merged result to a 32-bit Float TIFF. From there, we either downconvert with an algorithm (i.e. local adaptation) or manually tonemap the wide dynamic range of the HDR into the narrower dynamic range of a 16-bit or 8-bit image for publication online.
That, I understand.
Thanks for the clarification.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #42 on: September 03, 2014, 11:43:02 AM »

westr70

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 227
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #43 on: September 03, 2014, 12:22:32 PM »
I HDR most of my images, but I use the tech to bring out the visual beauty in the scenes not turn it into a bad velvet painting  ::).....but it has already been said "to each their own".

Would you care to share your technique.  I like the effect and would like to achieve that. 
Best.
5DIII; 600D; 7D; 100-400mm, f4.5-5.6; EFS-18-135, f3.5-5.6; 100mm, f2.8 IS; 70-200mm, F4 L IS; 17-40mm, f4 L USM; Sigma 50 mm, f2.8.
http://500px.com/Westr70
http://www.facebook.com/JohnFosterPhotography

Famateur

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 710
Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #44 on: September 03, 2014, 12:50:26 PM »
For me, HDR processing is like adding vignettes: If it's immediately noticeable, it's usually too much.

Typical HDR image processing tends to look flat (two-dimensional), have strange smears and halos, crunchy texture and over-the-top colors. When I see an image, I want to see depth. I want to feel it pull me into its perspective. With the typical HDR image, it's almost like my eyes don't know where to start -- even with an otherwise excellent composition. Instead of a wide-angle view of the interior of a rusted-out car, with mountains and sky in the distance out the windows, I see a everything at once, as if it was on the same plane -- like a chalk painting. Just a visual overload for me.

Of course for many, HDR processing is artistic in nature. That's cool. It adds variety. Not my cup o' tea, though. I'll stick to using HDR to overcome the limits of my camera's sensor and blend exposures to produce what still looks like a realistic photograph. For me, typical HDR processing works against my pursuit of depth and perspective through light and shadow.

To each their own. The whole point of photography is to produce an image that's pleasing to someone, even if only for the one behind the camera. If you like artsy HDR, by all means, keep doing it. Life is short -- do what you love and makes you truly happy.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: My kind of HDR
« Reply #44 on: September 03, 2014, 12:50:26 PM »