Asked by Kelly Nichols — 10 Apr 2012
3,657 Views, Asked 3 years ago
Bincy Stephen said:
I agree, I think that HDR is a great effect but it's a bit redundant nowadays. I know it is used to incorporate a dream-like vibe to the image but lately it's been taking away from the true beauty of the photograph. And yes, over saturation and a cartoon-like effect are often the end result
3 years ago
Jason Platt said:
I have found it as a great tool to enhance black and white shots...
2 years, 10 months ago
Adam S. N. said:
Personally, an HDR app is the only way I get what I consider to be usable photos from my cell phone... which to be honest is very convenient. And yes, for black and white photos HDR can be a good tool, but my real preference for B&W is blown whites and infinite blacks!
Jeffrey Chastain said:
HDR is completely overused. As an old person with actual darkroom training in BW and in Color, I can tell you that a "true black" and a white highlight with substance were the ultimate goal. Not contracting dynamic range until the lighting was completely obliterated. The way HDR is misused to cover up poor exposures makes me sad. Give me shadows with subtle detail and highlights that are not blown to kingdom come. Thats what makes a good photo. Don't get me wrong, if the range of light was too much for the film that you were using, we used tricks to compress the range in development. But you still wanted to reveal the light. That is ultimately what you are photographing. LIGHT.
2 years, 9 months ago
Kelly Nichols said:
Jeffrey, I totally agree -- especially your last line. Photography is indeed about the light. I like to fool around with different effects, but ultimately it is the light that makes the photo.
Keith de Solla said:
While I have seen some very good HDR photos on jpgmag.com, in general I feel its overused.
HDR is like eating at a buffet,sometime you just have to stop.
Jef Price(deleted) said:
Haha I love the look when it's done right, but I feel like people that really get into it just go waaay overboard with how they use it. However, the beauty of our art form is that we're all able to do things our way and express ourselves. I feel that if the HDR process is what gives the artist the ability to show things the way he sees them then it's the process they should use. I'm personally anti Photoshop for the most part. I do everything with the camera and lens/filters and lighting. I feel thats the process that I express myself the best with, if the best way for someone to express themselves is through large amounts of editing or through HDR ten more power to them. It's an art form limited only by our ability to overcome our limits.
2 years, 8 months ago
Terry Bell said:
HDR is just another tool for us to use if we so desire. Jef Price - the last sentnece of your comment, in my opinion says it all.
2 years, 6 months ago
Donald Garrett said:
I completely agree with Regenia Brabham! It makes a nice effect, but, to me looks unnecessarily surreal.
2 years, 3 months ago
Michael Holden said:
Personally, I abuse it as often as I can. One of my greatest pleasures in life is being a lazy, ignorant punk and doing a big fat line of HDR before sunrise so I can go out with some absurd tripod and start taking 27-frame brackets of brick walls and clouds and piles of trash....then, I rush home so I can start torturing the pixels into garish, over-worked, hideously saturated abominations that make serious, educated, tasteful photographers wince in pain and avert their gaze from what certainly isn't art, or even a photograph but...a monstrosity.
Reality is for n00bs. Manipulating reality into your vision? Now we're getting somewhere. All about the light you say? Hah. After you see the world in 32 bits nothing will be the same again.
Just call me the HDR Soul.
2 years, 2 months ago
Jordan Whyte said:
HDR is a technique that should be used when it is necessary. Only an artist can determine when it should or should not be done. Please do not say HDR is for lazy people! That is not fair.
2 years, 1 month ago
Tom Hopkins said:
HDR, a bit cartoonish if mishandled. Lazy, I know a guy who shoots 360 degree panoramas, does them in HDR, then pixel hunts the image to see if he got anything worth a f***! Now THAT'S lazy! But it's effective if you only have minutes to work from a single position. His slit camera uses film, so he merges scans. This also provides plenty o' pixels to play with.
JP Thompson said:
HDR has its place, as long as it isn't overdone. Many old-timers who despise it are the same guys that spent years in the darkroom dodging, burning, creating tintypes, converting to black n white, and all other sorts of manipulations.
I strongly believe in getting it right "in camera," but if I see a scene that I think might look nice in HDR, I'll bracket two or three photos and check it out. I rarely choose them over the correctly exposed photo "in the middle," but sometimes it's better. BTW, many clients buying prints don't know the difference, but they seem to love a subtly done HDR photo.
We may as well get used to it.
1 year, 10 months ago
Norm Levin said:
HiDef allows folks skilled in that method to show off their technical chops. Same can be said of just about any photo innovation, it can be quickly overused. Remember the vast catch of fisheye images when those lenses first came out? Or UV film? Or zooming with slow shutters? (Oh, that's one of MY tricks.)
Having a vision, creating a unique image, then enhancing it to its max to me is what photographic art is all about.
Jimmy Bivona said:
HDR is just another great tool. Making pictures is just an amalgam of various techniques and , for me, how I feel is paramount. Pushing the button or tapping the keys all relate to what pops out of the printer.
1 year, 9 months ago
I have seen very few HDR images that satisfy me artistically. Many of them end up looking like cheesy 1950s postcards. I honestly feel that some folks use that technique to cover up bad basic photographic skills.
1 year, 8 months ago
Regenia Brabham said:
I think in the right circumstances it is a great tool but often find the effects cartoonish and over saturated.
...and I believe that it is sometimes used in photos / for subjects that would look much better without the effect.
2 years, 11 months ago
missy corrales said:
Totally agree, it is often over done to the point it looks too fake and destroys the photograph completely. To add a slight contrast punch is fine but not to the extreme its often used as.
2 years, 12 months ago
Marcus Hammerschmitt said:
HDR is for lazy people.
Signup or Login to answer.
.... FIELD OF EMPTY CHAIRS ....by Barbara Kurth
53 Views » 0 Comments » 0 Votes
513 Views » 6 Comments » 0 Votes
788 Views » 0 Comments » 0 Votes
© 8020 Media, Inc. 2006 - 2015. Contributions © their respective holders.
About · Advertising ·