HD photography

My Sunday morning rant.

Along the line of post-processing from a prior post else-where: HDR.
At first I was excited about the concept, because I am a shadow chaser. I love contrasts. But have a dickens of a time capturing it with digital equipment.

One inherent fault of digital is its inability, or relative deficit, to capture detail in challenging light conditions. Their dynamic range is still less than a good SLR with the right film.

Now we have RAW and post-processing software in the digital darkroom. HDR software provides us with a tool to achieve those high dynamic ranges once only obtainable with SLRs and good film, with a bit of masking in post-processing, if need be.

But lately I see a plethora of hyperrealistic, sometimes garish photos. They lose their depth, often looking like cartoons or flat pictures. It reminds me of the old metallic paintings; even those retained some depth. It's reflective of the prevalent 'more is better' attitude. Because of that, I have had no interest in HDR technique and software. I didn't like the results.

Until recently (after reading a critical article on its use), I now see that it can be a valuable tool and it does not by default render the hyper/surrealistic photos that I see too often (flat with no depth, too saturated, etc). It's a matter of subtlety. Unless one is trying to achieve a hyperrealistic/cartoonish image, HDR can be an asset to increase detail in dark and light contrasting areas of an image, resulting in an image matching what our eyes really see.

Now I'm ready to explore the new technology.
I need a better tripod

I see your point and have read much criticism on the subject as well. However, I simply see it as using the tools available for another artistic outlet and another form of expression. It's not for some, but heck, for those that enjoy it, more power to you. I do however believe that just like everything else in the art world, there's tons of copycats who will do it poorly, and a few who will have the eye and technique to produce something that stands above the rest.

gixxerjasen said:

I see your point and have read much criticism on the subject as well. However, I simply see it as using the tools available for another artistic outlet and another form of expression. It's not for some, but heck, for those that enjoy it, more power to you. I do however believe that just like everything else in the art world, there's tons of copycats who will do it poorly, and a few who will have the eye and technique to produce something that stands above the rest.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

Hmmm.... was it an old Lone Star bus that prompted the thread? lol.... (wasn't an HDR attempt either, just super high contrasts.....)

Seriously, I totally agree with you on the capabilities of a post-processing digital darkroom and what can be done. I've tried the super high contrast stuff just to see what could be done, and as of this date haven't even attempted to do an HDR rendition.

Some of the words you use describe a pro at HDR, such as subtle, are spot on. It's the variety of multiple subtle changes that bring a picture to a surreal level in what I view as a good HDR image.

.

M38A1 said:

Hmmm.... was it an old Lone Star bus that prompted the thread? lol.... (wasn't an HDR attempt either, just super high contrasts.....)

Click to expand...

I didn't see that.

Nothing in particular prompted my post, except for the exceptional article I read and learning that HDR software and technique does not always result in the hyperrealism that I see often. In fact, one would never realize that the photos in the article were the results of using HDR. It changed my opinion of HDR.

On the other hand, I do realize that the tool can also be useful for purposeful surreal/hyperrealism. I've toyed with that only a few times and one of the results I like rather well. But it was meant to be surreal and it obviously is.

Photography can be just snap shots. It can also be much more, depending on the photographer's purpose and intent. It can be artistic expression and a statement, as well as only capturing a moment in space and time. As a scientist, I even see art in in vivo imaging at the smallest denominator. Photojournalism and documentary photography are especially interesting to me (e.g. Diane Arbus and, especially, Dorothea Lange).

Photography can be objective and subjective, depending on the context. And the latter is most important.

Okay guys, you got me. Harley Davidson Racing?
High def recidivism, um .....
HDR is what to digital photography?
Love my raw photos and the quality makes it nice to work with in CS4.
Ride on

High Dynamic Range... HDR.

This article explains it better than I could.