Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Compact System Cameras => Topic started by: leuallen on May 25, 2013, 12:51:26 PM

Title: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: leuallen on May 25, 2013, 12:51:26 PM
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
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: kaelaria on May 25, 2013, 02:00:29 PM
No, more like this :)

(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8078/8265401445_bed88d1fc4.jpg)
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Chairman Bill on May 25, 2013, 02:36:02 PM
The OP's image is fine. The yellow car is bloody awful
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: PeterAit on May 25, 2013, 02:43:26 PM
 No, that is skillful and appropriate HDR. In fact, I would not have guessed HDR if you had not mentioned it.
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: leuallen on May 25, 2013, 03:01:13 PM
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
Title: Hate is too strong a word
Post by: Telecaster on May 25, 2013, 03:28:13 PM
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.   ;)

-Dave-
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: leuallen on May 25, 2013, 04:13:00 PM
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
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on May 25, 2013, 04:26:35 PM
The OP's image is fine. The yellow car is bloody awful
+1.
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: RFPhotography on May 25, 2013, 06:21:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Tony Jay on May 25, 2013, 06:33:03 PM
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
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: wolfnowl on May 25, 2013, 09:23:45 PM
Well done, Larry. Thanks for sharing it!

Mike.
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 26, 2013, 01:48:56 AM
Excellent processing; quite appropriate for the subject.
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: mac_paolo on May 26, 2013, 02:41:48 AM
HDR is a status, not a technique.
I think the way you approached that is perfectly acceptable and good looking.
Nice shot!
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Alan Smallbone on May 26, 2013, 11:50:10 AM
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.  ;D

Alan
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: leuallen on May 26, 2013, 12:02:30 PM
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
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Roman Racela on May 26, 2013, 06:28:53 PM
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
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: slothead on May 28, 2013, 10:45:24 PM
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,
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Iluvmycam on May 29, 2013, 01:53:01 PM
I love HDR is all forms pretty much. If it works, it is fine. If it does not work then I wont use it.
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: duane_bolland on May 30, 2013, 01:52:51 PM
The OP's image is fine. The yellow car is bloody awful
+2
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: kayakfari on June 01, 2013, 02:10:51 PM
The consensus is clear! IMHO the best HDR is the one you can't really tell was redone ..
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: Guillermo Luijk on June 08, 2013, 08:28:42 PM
HDR stands for High Dynamic Range. There is not such high dynamic range in your scene, so you just used the local contrast enhancement capabilities of some HDR software to achieve a particular look that you liked, but in no way this is HDR.

Said that, I could accept your image as a good looking one. The Beetle image is terrible.

Regards
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: leuallen on June 08, 2013, 09:40:24 PM
Guillermo,

Nit!nit!nit! :)

Larry
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: hjulenissen on June 09, 2013, 01:10:55 AM
Is there a philosophical difference between tonemapping and dodging&burning? I'd assume that a Photoshopper with bad skills/taste could produce images on par with the worst tonemappings out there?

-h
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: stevesanacore on June 09, 2013, 10:26:40 AM
You never know when the worst photoshopped mistake is going to be the next big fad when it comes to art and advertising  :o
Title: Re: Is this the HDR you all hate?
Post by: KHP on June 24, 2013, 10:17:42 PM
The OP's image is fine. The yellow car is bloody awful

SAME...the OP's image is really quite nice from a restorers 60-year perspective....Nice Job!! 8)