Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bob Blaylock" data-source="post: 485780" data-attributes="member: 16749">I suppose we can quibble over the exact definition of “High Dynamic Range”, and whether what I described qualifies.&nbsp; The fact remains, and the point remains, that a .NEF from a D3200 contains quite a bit more dynamic range than the D3200 seems to be capable of outputting in a .JPG; and by using the method that I describe, I have consistently been able to take a picture of a scene containing a wide dynamic range, and to produce a final result in which details are preserved in the highlights and the shadows that are lost in any .JPG that I can get directly from the camera.&nbsp; To me, this is the defining purpose of HDR—to avoid losing details in the shadows or the highlights, that are lost in a picture produced by normal means.&nbsp; I do not much care for “that over the top wacky &quot;HDR&quot; look”, and do not ever normally have the intent of producing it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bob Blaylock, post: 485780, member: 16749"] I suppose we can quibble over the exact definition of “High Dynamic Range”, and whether what I described qualifies. The fact remains, and the point remains, that a .NEF from a D3200 contains quite a bit more dynamic range than the D3200 seems to be capable of outputting in a .JPG; and by using the method that I describe, I have consistently been able to take a picture of a scene containing a wide dynamic range, and to produce a final result in which details are preserved in the highlights and the shadows that are lost in any .JPG that I can get directly from the camera. To me, this is the defining purpose of HDR—to avoid losing details in the shadows or the highlights, that are lost in a picture produced by normal means. I do not much care for [i]“that over the top wacky "HDR" look”[/i], and do not ever normally have the intent of producing it. [/QUOTE]

Verification