Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Tutorials
Do You Really Need HDR When You Have High Dynamic Range?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 291728" data-attributes="member: 9240"><p><strong>Re: Do You Really Need HDR When Your Sensor Already Has High Dynamic Range?</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Dave, I agree the level of skill has a lot to do with success in producing HDR images. My intention here is not to provide a roadmap to getting all the way home, it's meant more as a way to improve your starting off point when you wanted to shoot something that the camera <em>refused to capture</em> because of the lighting conditions. As I've stated in the original post, none of the images shown at the end of each method are meant to serve as finished examples. Each method is simply a first step in getting the photographer closer to what they had hoped they'd get when they shot the image. There are plenty of posts to be found here that ask about why something metered the way it did, or how can they possibly take a photo in lighting conditions when every metering mode produces similar hot/cold images. I contend that these techniques can <em><strong>help</strong></em> save a lot of those. Just how much will depend on the limitations of the camera <em>and </em>the person doing the post processing.</p><p></p><p>That said, I'd be happy to work up something showing the same set of bracketed images taken through the HDR process, with one set being the full set of bracketed images, and the other being just the '0' images with EV manipulation in Lightroom. My contention is that the limitations of where you can go with that depend <em>primarily </em>on the limitations of the sensor, and <em>secondarily</em> on the person given that back half is an "all things being equal" component.</p><p></p><p>And again, this is not about bias towards or away from HDR, it's about alternatives to situations where the photographer might feel that in order to get the image they want for a certain lighting situation they <strong><em>need</em> </strong>to use HDR tools. Like all PP, it's a tool in the chest of the photographer, and one that requires work to understand and use. I could put the same 3 bracketed images up and ask 20 different people (of similar skill levels or not) to process them any way they want, HDR or otherwise, and I suspect we'd wind up with some very different, while altogether pleasing images as a result.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 291728, member: 9240"] [b]Re: Do You Really Need HDR When Your Sensor Already Has High Dynamic Range?[/b] Dave, I agree the level of skill has a lot to do with success in producing HDR images. My intention here is not to provide a roadmap to getting all the way home, it's meant more as a way to improve your starting off point when you wanted to shoot something that the camera [I]refused to capture[/I] because of the lighting conditions. As I've stated in the original post, none of the images shown at the end of each method are meant to serve as finished examples. Each method is simply a first step in getting the photographer closer to what they had hoped they'd get when they shot the image. There are plenty of posts to be found here that ask about why something metered the way it did, or how can they possibly take a photo in lighting conditions when every metering mode produces similar hot/cold images. I contend that these techniques can [I][B]help[/B][/I] save a lot of those. Just how much will depend on the limitations of the camera [I]and [/I]the person doing the post processing. That said, I'd be happy to work up something showing the same set of bracketed images taken through the HDR process, with one set being the full set of bracketed images, and the other being just the '0' images with EV manipulation in Lightroom. My contention is that the limitations of where you can go with that depend [I]primarily [/I]on the limitations of the sensor, and [I]secondarily[/I] on the person given that back half is an "all things being equal" component. And again, this is not about bias towards or away from HDR, it's about alternatives to situations where the photographer might feel that in order to get the image they want for a certain lighting situation they [B][I]need[/I] [/B]to use HDR tools. Like all PP, it's a tool in the chest of the photographer, and one that requires work to understand and use. I could put the same 3 bracketed images up and ask 20 different people (of similar skill levels or not) to process them any way they want, HDR or otherwise, and I suspect we'd wind up with some very different, while altogether pleasing images as a result. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Tutorials
Do You Really Need HDR When You Have High Dynamic Range?
Top
