HDR photos

[gimp]

Here is a sample of some of the work I have been doing of late. Your thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks

[SmartWombat]

Typical HDR, I hate it.
The haloes around the trees and along the treeline ruin it for me in the 1st shot, and in the second the uneven illumination on the wall left of the wheel by the wheel shadow and sunlight spot just looks impossible.
Some say it has a painting-like effect, and if it's used subtly that's true. Like the orton effect if it's overused HDR can ruin an otherwise good image.

[Rmagers3505]

The jury is still out for me when it comes to HDR. Some good some not so... That being said #1 is the best of the two. The sky is awesome, however i find my being drawn down to the fence in the FG lower right corner. Might cropping it out.

There something about #2 that I can't put my finger one. Appears cluttered, My focus keeps jumping from the rocks in the FG to the fence on hte the left to the red support in the middle. I don't think this is as much an HDR issue as just composition. that just my opinion.

Keep trying though. Looks like you have great ideas.

[hminx]

Personally I think HDR tends to ruin skies, it turns an otherwise pleasant scene apocalyptical

[SmartWombat]

HDR is good with static scenes it seems, add a breath of wind blowing things about and it doesn't work well.
apocalyptic can be good.
apocalyptic with a thin band of pretty blue sky around the waving trees isn't.

I'm going to try it with my Niagara photos, but I expect it to be useless becuase of the movement of the spray from the horseshoe falls.

[arne saknussen]

HDR is good with static scenes it seems, add a breath of wind blowing things about and it doesn't work well.
apocalyptic can be good.
apocalyptic with a thin band of pretty blue sky around the waving trees isn't.

I'm going to try it with my Niagara photos, but I expect it to be useless becuase of the movement of the spray from the horseshoe falls.

Try a single shot HDR of one of your Niagara shots.

[jonlastimosa]

are you using HDR Effects pro?

[LeeIs]

The 2nd one is the better photo. It needs a punch though. a bit more contrast. darker blacks basically.

[EOSThree]

I usually go for a natural looking HDR photograph. The sky is interesting in #1 but it's obviously HDR, nothing looks like that in real life, I'd be scared if it did. There is nothing wrong with that, but it screams processed, HDR. #2 is much more subtle and while still looking HDR, it doesn't scream it, but rather whispers it. I think with some processing from where it is now it will be a very good photo with a large dynamic range.

In my Post processing, my initial pass is though the HDR program. I experiment with the amount to make it look as natural as possible. That is just the start though. The "finished" HDR then goes back into Lightroom and gets tweaked like any other photo to get a very natural look. I've also experimented with going the opposite direction in mimicking HDR by using PP in LR and PSe.

Many of the photos I've posted here are HDR photos, but I've never felt the need to label them such. Am I fooling somebody? I don't think so, I am applying darkroom techniques that have been used for ages, but now they are much easier to perform. HDR programs are like performing many dodges and burns without the tedious masking. Unfortunately the product is far from finished after being run through Photomatix or Nik HDR Efex Pro. That is merely a starting point.

[llewpics]

Gimp, thanks for sharing. HDR is highly controversial and can be abused. I have been learning how to do it myself. No matter what you do, though ...when doing HDR - you will not please everyone. If you are using photomatix - I would suggest to try painterly, but do no more than 60/100 on the effect strength. Adjust and use micro-contrast and micro-smoothing to get just the right amount of dynamic range and natural feel. Use the black and white sliders to increase contrast and don't be afraid to tweak the gamma slider a little bit as well. When done, take it back into your main editor and adjust further. Here are some things to avoid in the final product: halos, dirty whites, spotty and heavily grundged skies and highlights, unnatural skin tones, and similar.

Check out 3 examples of mine (all HDR):

http://500px.com/photo/1111809
http://500px.com/photo/1111791
http://500px.com/photo/1248119

As to your work, the first photo has a nice composition. The fence down and right needs to go ...I think you can crop the image next to the fence and be OK. Try and do the HDR again leaving the sky much brighter, and with more blue / white contrast. Try and reduce the lime green effect on the trees and make the greens a little more subdued.

In the 2nd image, what is going against you is the scene itself. The color and texture of the wheel are quite different than the fence on the left. Is it possible to isolate the wheel only?

Keep posting!

[mriley1138]

I'm do like HDR in general, but it has to be done right. I usually take one of the original photos with the best blue sky and mask it back into the HDR image. A blue sky doesn't need "dynamic range", while buildings or other static items with texture and shadow can certainly benefit.

[readingr]

I must admit I am not keen on HDR but the thing that hits me right away is that both photos are tilted to the left.

Roger R.