I thought I'd bring this up as some members are experimenting with it and I thought it would make a useful discussion. Tonemapping is not HDR (you cannot increase the dynamic range by manipulating a single image, that's another discussion), however it is an option in most HDR programs. I happen to like tonemapping but it has limitations and in many cases, leads to unnatural halos, gray skies and backgrounds.
Some shots are very receptive to it. The first shot is post processed normally and the second was tonemapped in Photomatix Light ($39). Generally, when you manipulate anything there is a cost, in this instance the clouds are a bit blown out. Feel free to comment/critique on any shots in this thread. Comparisons don't belong in critique, so I posted here. Please do not post HDR images here. Feel free to post your tonemapped shots, but be advised they will be open to critique in this thread. Be honest and polite, they go well together. An example to start us off,
Normal
Tonemapped
Some shots are very receptive to it. The first shot is post processed normally and the second was tonemapped in Photomatix Light ($39). Generally, when you manipulate anything there is a cost, in this instance the clouds are a bit blown out. Feel free to comment/critique on any shots in this thread. Comparisons don't belong in critique, so I posted here. Please do not post HDR images here. Feel free to post your tonemapped shots, but be advised they will be open to critique in this thread. Be honest and polite, they go well together. An example to start us off,
Normal
Tonemapped
Last edited: