Church HDRs

[Anbesol]

Not sure about these, how about the hotspot on the top of the middle table? Are the crops too tight? Can you tell they were HDR composites or does it just look normal and natural?

[OldClicker]

I think the dynamic range looks fine. Maybe a little more of the dark end could have been brought up on #1 to be able to better see the front below the windows and to bring out more of the stone texture.

Does #2 have a touch of tilt to the left?

TF

[gahspidy]

I agree the range looks good and these look natural, in that they do not have the over processed look. The hot spot on the table top in the middle aisle does not bother me.
The crops are fine with me.

[Shebang]

#1 is my favorite. And I would like it even better with the table just barely cropped out so you keep the glow on the floor. The windows are beautiful and stand on their own -- while the table makes me wonder why it is there and thus detracts from the windows.

[Anbesol]

Hmm, I see what you're saying Paula, the table is curious. Its at an episcopalian church, I don't know what purpose it serves. I might even be able to clone it out, that might be tough.

TF - I think its slight perspective or barrel distortion (shot at 24mm), I'll have to correct the distortion. What gave it away to you, was it the slight gap in the red carpet on the right?

Thanks for the input guys.

[OldClicker]

I get the sense of lean from the dark line between the two red things (step???), the alter cloth and (strongest) the line between the wood and stone on the back wall. - TF

[w.slayman]

I understand the premis of HDR since last week, and I am not a big fan it but I like both photos, with #1 being my favorite. In this case the HDR is handled very well.

[GB1]

The HDR seems to have done its job - everything is lit well enough to make out, etc.

If I may critique the rest of the two shots, I am not sure about the actual photo content here. I find the bright floor on the first really distracting, though I do like the top 2/3s of the image. The bottom one, with all those conflicting edges and colors, doesn't seem to work with me. You will notice the way the lines tilt away from the camera on the wooden wall: in shots like this the geometry really needs to be perfect. Jet has a technique to fix this using Photoshop (since you didn't have a tilt plane camera handy I am sure).

I think I need to be less picky in 2010 ..

g

[Shebang]

GB1: Well, then how are we going to learn anything?? I didn't see the tilt until you pointed it out............now, I do.

[daq7]

On the first shot I agree that I would like to see a bit more detail in the wall below the windows. I realize it is a chore to get tone mapping to do what you want it to. It is a good shot. The windows are gorgeous, and the foreground seems fine to me including the hot spot. But what do I know?

[daq7]

Oh and on the question of whether they look like HDR? Yes, they do, but not in an obvious way. I think anyone who has tried to take shots like this is going to realize they are HDR, but they certainly don't have any grunge in them...

[Snapac]

I've longed to shoot this church, but whenever I return from my trips to downtown Lawrenceville, there is either too much traffic or not enough time. There is some noticeable grudge, but I posted this anyway because I love the clouds. (a larger view can be found at my members' gallery)

[daq7]

Yeah snapac, i like it too. It is gorgeous. Even the relatively plain foreground dos not detract from that. It looks quite clean to me. It is unfortunate there is not something in the extreme foreground. Doesn't that usually help?

But for me taking pictures of skies like that was the draw of HDR. And in many ways it still is.