I'd like to start a bit of a debate/sharing of opinions in two separate forums regarding the use of HDR and B&W on Caedes. I want to keep the ideas separate, so check out the discussion on B&W here...
HDR is a great technique. It helps create images that would have been impossible using one single exposure...but, in my opinion, there is one major caveat: you must know when to say when. It's like color saturation and sharpness...a razor-sharp image bursting with color will knock you out of your chair. But (and nobody will argue this with me) there's a point at which an image is too saturated or too sharp.
But, it seems like HDR is being handled differently (not only on Caedes, but on many other sites I've visited). HDR can create a surreal image that just takes your breathe away. But, when used incorrectly, too much, or in the wrong situation, it creates an image where you just have to say...whoa, toooo much!! Those are the cases (mostly when there's a large area of uninterrupted color like the sky) where it's just a noisy mess, strewn about with weird looking artifacts. There's also that strange halo effect that pops up a lot of the time. There may be 1 time out of 100 that this effect is intentional...but, for the most part, it's an unwanted side-effect.
My thoughts are this: decide what your intentions are for your shot before applying the technique. I know most people are not Photoshop masters and HDR is an easy technique that can drastically change an images appearance. But, there's a problem with that...instead of taking the time to plan for your image you can just click a button or two and presto-chango, you got yourself a winner!!
Here's an example of when not to use HDR: It's early in the morning and the sun's just starting to come up. You've got a majestic mountain in front of you just soaked with beautiful sunlight. Only problem is the foreground hasn't seen the sun yet. Instead of taking a few exposures and combining them to control the areas of light and shadow...pull out your trusty graduated neutral density filter and control the difference in lighting before the image ever reaches the computer. Now, instead of having this unnatural HDR shot filled with noise and artifacts, you've got a perfectly exposed representation of what you saw with your own two eyes.
I hope that didn't come off as a rant, but I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on the subject. Do you agree? When are some good situations to use the technique? Maybe you disagree...share your thoughts. Looking forward to a heated debate!!!
HDR is a great technique. It helps create images that would have been impossible using one single exposure...but, in my opinion, there is one major caveat: you must know when to say when. It's like color saturation and sharpness...a razor-sharp image bursting with color will knock you out of your chair. But (and nobody will argue this with me) there's a point at which an image is too saturated or too sharp.
But, it seems like HDR is being handled differently (not only on Caedes, but on many other sites I've visited). HDR can create a surreal image that just takes your breathe away. But, when used incorrectly, too much, or in the wrong situation, it creates an image where you just have to say...whoa, toooo much!! Those are the cases (mostly when there's a large area of uninterrupted color like the sky) where it's just a noisy mess, strewn about with weird looking artifacts. There's also that strange halo effect that pops up a lot of the time. There may be 1 time out of 100 that this effect is intentional...but, for the most part, it's an unwanted side-effect.
My thoughts are this: decide what your intentions are for your shot before applying the technique. I know most people are not Photoshop masters and HDR is an easy technique that can drastically change an images appearance. But, there's a problem with that...instead of taking the time to plan for your image you can just click a button or two and presto-chango, you got yourself a winner!!
Here's an example of when not to use HDR: It's early in the morning and the sun's just starting to come up. You've got a majestic mountain in front of you just soaked with beautiful sunlight. Only problem is the foreground hasn't seen the sun yet. Instead of taking a few exposures and combining them to control the areas of light and shadow...pull out your trusty graduated neutral density filter and control the difference in lighting before the image ever reaches the computer. Now, instead of having this unnatural HDR shot filled with noise and artifacts, you've got a perfectly exposed representation of what you saw with your own two eyes.
I hope that didn't come off as a rant, but I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on the subject. Do you agree? When are some good situations to use the technique? Maybe you disagree...share your thoughts. Looking forward to a heated debate!!!