WATCH TALK FORUMS banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,297 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)


Royal Gorge Route Railroad, Cañon City, Colorado

Larger size: 2081 x 1429 wide (original was 7360 x 4912)
http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee69/FL_Investor/800_0562PHMXe.jpg

Nikon D800, Nikkor 16-35mm f4 VR @35mm, ISO 500, f4, 1/200s, Edited from a single RAW file in Photomatix 4.1

(I was pretty happy about how this lens performed wide opened at f4. Normally with a scenery like
this, one would naturally chose f8 or even higher. However, the train was moving I needed a relatively
faster shutter speed, so I had to use f4, since I did not want to push ISO any further)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,297 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
What does it look like with "traditional" post processing?
Well that all depends....as the post processing is subjective and also depends on personal
taste and vision of the person who took and edited the picture. So what is "traditional'
post processing and by who's definition ? Is something considered HDR, just because it is
tone-mapped and the dynamic range of the image is 'pushed' ?...or does it it have to be
a traditional blend of multiple bracketed images that are exposed differently?

Tough to say. I have seen some post processing from a single JPG that just screams:
"This is overdone cartoon-ish HDR image", but then I have seen some images that are a
trued HDR images composed from 3,5,7 or even 9 large RAW images, ...but one would be hard
pressed to say that it is an 'HDR image' as whoever edited them wanted only very natural
and subtle look.

I guess in this case we will never know what is a "traditional" post processing' with my image,
because 'above is the way' I decided to post process this particular photo.
What I wanted was kind of a blend of natural but also clearly HDR (but not overly done) look.

The point I tried to make is that these new cameras have such a wide dynamic range (which is
amazing 14.4 EVs with Nikon D800)
, that one no longer needs to have bracketed images and
in order to recover shadows and/or highlights - one single RAW image could often times be enough.
This is a HUGE advantage as one can achieve this type of look without using multiple bracketed
images ....and for that, most of times a tripod is necessary. It was especially beneficial in this case
where bracketed images were totally out of question (I was on a platform of a moving train,
so tripod or not - the scenery was moving pretty fast).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts


Royal Gorge Route Railroad, Cañon City, Colorado

Larger size: 2081 x 1429 wide (original was 7360 x 4912)
http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee69/FL_Investor/800_0562PHMXe.jpg

Nikon D800, Nikkor 16-35mm f4 VR @35mm, ISO 500, f4, 1/200s, Edited from a single RAW file in Photomatix 4.1

(I was pretty happy about how this lens performed wide opened at f4. Normally with a scenery like
this, one would naturally chose f8 or even higher. However, the train was moving I needed a relatively
faster shutter speed, so I had to use f4, since I did not want to push ISO any further)
Wow, man, I'm diggin' this.

I've been getting into HDR and tone-mapping lately, and have been doing a lot of it.

A good friend of mine, and a very respected photographer, has cautioned me about doing it too much, as it's starting to be considered "amateurish" amongs some pro circles. Whatever. I still dig it.

Nice work, man... Really...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,297 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
Wow, man, I'm diggin' this.

I've been getting into HDR and tone-mapping lately, and have been doing a lot of it.

A good friend of mine, and a very respected photographer, has cautioned me about doing it too much, as it's starting to be considered "amateurish" amongs some pro circles. Whatever. I still dig it.

Nice work, man... Really...

Thanks, Left Coaster...glad you enjoyed it.
As far as your friend - I hear you, many (most? all?) all time "pro' photographers frown on HDR,....oh well.
I could go on and type a full page about my thoughts about 'old time photographers' (with all due respect to your friend),
but I am am not going to do that.
I am sure (hope) that your friend is not one of them, but quite frankly I take with a grain of salt as far as what some
of these guys are saying. Hearing some of them reminds me listening to some old pre-NASCAR bootleg-alcohol smugglers
driving fast V8 cars with carburetors in today's age of Formula One ....if ya' know what I mean :wink:

HDR is not 'IT".....it's not the savior or holy grail....it's just fun, its part of today's digital world of photography
and for better or worse - it's here to stay.......The sooner they get it, the better.
(...and I am NOT talking about your friend, as IMO he rightfully warned you about not 'doing it too much')
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
285 Posts
For what it's worth, coming from an old school shooter. Ansel Adams would have loved HDR and basically, his zone system was the precursor in B&W.
BUT much HDR is poorly executed. The purpose of zone system and HDR are to bring the dynamic range or 'tonal scale; of the image, in alignment with what the human eye' with it's 40MP 'sensor' can experience.
Most folks just getting into HDR, over-extend the range, which has the effect of 'flattening' the picture. I have a friend that is constantly doing that and were it not that he's also a contemporary, I'd chide him for it.
Before I'd caught wind of HDR I was doing a lot of scale compression in photoshop the hard way, in Layer Options process. A pain yes. But It gave me a lot of control.
I'm not sure why the single image HDR's always seem to flatten out but can you control the Shadow, Midrange, Highlights at all in whatever program you're using?
Sky Art Tints and shades Leisure Event

http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r105/nikoncp5k/MGR_1.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
I agree wholeheartedly with Zephyrnoid, above. Those 'Pros' who frown on HDR usually fall into two camps. One, the examples they have seen have been over extended and appear so unrealistic that they are indeed cartoonish, (and they have never tried the process themselves), or Two, they may or may not understand the process, but lack the computing skills to follow the process. I've found that those in the 2nd camp, usually don't shoot RAW either. A brilliant panorama landscape photographer I know, has only recently moved to digital, and only because his Graphic Artist daughter has been doing his post processing for him. :D


Sent from a tiny little keyboard with big fingers, while holding a glass of pretty good scotch. Please forgive any typos...
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top