With apologies to Mr. Shakespeare
Can someone tell me why photographers use HDR
When there is no apparent need for it?
Click to enlarge
HDR needed (IMO) – No, No, Yes
All three images from the website – The HDR Image
I often see HDR images that make me ask – WHY?!?!
There may be a reason, but it’s not obvious
One thing is clear though -
It was NOT because the dynamic range was too wide
The photographer who made the above three images (nice website, check it out)
Specializes in HDR as a teacher and author
He certainly understands when & why – and why not
So I suspect he had reasons for the 1st two other than the dynamic range being too great
Granted there might be a tiny bright spot or two, but
There are easier and more effective ways to handle them than HDR
Unless a natural image isn’t your goal
I saw many images like the 1st one (bright sunny day, front lit subject – palm tree shadows on the church front)
Posted daily on the HDR Efex Pro beta site by professionals
Showing how “great” HDR software handled their latest 5-bracketed exposures
I never asked “why” (a beta site isn’t the place to question a photographer’s work)
But – certainly wondered
I’m still trying to understand
When it comes to pros I suspect the answer is that
It’s very hard these days to make a living in photography
Many pros are switching to teaching to augment their income
It helps if they can make potential customers view the world through HDR lens
Like a carpenter with a hammer – everything looks like a nail
Hey – in the early days of HDR (think Photomatix v1, now 4.1)
Grunge was “invented” by pros hit by loss of sales of images
And – that invention spawned a small industry
(A couple of pros reprimanded me when I stated that HDR was first and foremost needed to create natural images in situations otherwise impossible. Their position was that a big reason for HDR programs was to “create that HDR-look”. I can guess what they do for a living. ;-) )
When it comes to non-pros
I think “HDR-look belief” has lead to a generation of newbie’s whose answer to Shakespeare’s question is -
Hell, yes – HDR, no matter what.
Why else would you use it? :-(
Just sayin’ …..
At the start of the HDR Efex Pro 2 beta a number of pros (read instructors) complained that HEP 2 was too simple – even while admitting it did provide natural looking results right from the default preset.
The most replied to beta forum thread was titled (by the poster)
Canned HDR for the Masses?
Via a lot of condescending remarks the message came through -
The interface & controls were too simple (not professional enough)
Getting the “grunge” effects of the original HDR Efex seemed to take a back seat to making natural images
(Thanks, Nik, for listening to the rest of us after that disaster that was the original version ;-) )
My reply was -
QUOTE (Ed Knepley @ May 10 2012, 04:07 AM)“As long as the main objective of a HDR program is to produce realistic & natural results for a scene whose dynamic range exceeds the latitude of the camera’s sensor….”
Which got this immediate “pro” response
“I don’t agree with that statement at all.”…..
(followed by others)
Be aware of carpenters with hammers….
Subscribe (see sidebar) and don’t miss anything. New posts daily.
- No sidebar? Click the blog title at the top of this page.
Another option – Click on the “Follow” button at the bottom right of the screen.
- Or - “Follow” in your admin bar, displayed at the top of the screen, for logged-in WordPress.com users.