Bad HDR shot of the day

http://www.magazine.utoronto.ca/pho...-badlands-queenston-shale-mark-shannon-photo/

 

shot x 3 exposure? What kind of HDR is that supposed to be?
This is an "aspiring professional photographer?

....and he works at Henry's in Toronto!
Rich, it is time for you to pay them a visit, this guy has some
'splainin' to do.

 

What's the difference between a BA in Visual Communictions, and a large
pizza? A large pizza can feed a family of three...

 

There was one guy from Henry's who took some interesting shots of
power towers with large format gear. But the horrifying thing about
gross HDR is that it has leaked into the professional realm, I'm
seeing it show up in ads. Truly distressing.

 

It is if it is used "for the sake of". However, there are situations
when a genuine need for HDR processing is required and absolutely no
other method will produce the result needed. Having said that, it
should only be used in extreme cases and only to obtain the actual HDR
and not an overprocessed, unnatural eyesore. I do certainly object to
some pro photographers (especially photo journalists) creating these
"unnatural" looking images just for the sake of dramatic effect.

MC

 

Agreed. There is a place for HDR, and results can be very effective,
especially when it comes to artistic interpretation, and it can be used
well in advertising copy. It does not have a place in photojournalism.
HDR when used intelligently and not "over processed" is a useful tool.

....and the example provided in this thread is a poor, and unnecessary
execution of HDR, resulting in an awful image of particularly
uninteresting scene. There was about as much dramatic effect imparted
to that scene as you would find in a bowl of oatmeal.

 

I keep hearing that. Yet what I see in the magazines and such is
mostly the silly, garish stuff.

 

That's OK, but then you are not much of a landscape type of guy. Your
interests seem to be more with the odd and quirky character shots, a
little urban decay, along with the passing parade.

Here is one with a little rural decay. ;-)
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Carrizo-HDR-Comp.jpg >

 

That's true, but my "not much" means I don't have an interest in
photographing landscape scenes. That doesn't mean I can't be
appreciative of what others do when it's done right.

To me, an interesting landscape has to have an interesting feature
that prominently figures in. Your linked photo just snatches a wide
field view of rocks and trees and includes a sky that doesn't look
like sky.

Your

Yes, that does appeal to me a little bit more, but it's not a
well-composed photograph. Is it a photo of an old tractor or a photo
of a tractor out in a field and that is part of a landscape?

The biggest problem for me is the disparity between the sky and the
foreground. It's like the sky was shot on one day and the foreground
on another. I don't know why HDR enthusiasts like dark and foreboding
skies, especially when the other features of the image don't lend
themselves to dark and foreboding.

I would have shot the tractor much tighter or gone 'way back and shot
the landscape with the tractor as man's contribution to the landscape
and the impermanence of what man contributes compared to nature.

The tractor is well done with the HDR treatment, but the rest of the
shot competes too much with the tractor. Nature isn't this garish. I
don't do HDR, and don't know if this is possible, but think this would
be done better masking the tractor and treating only the tractor with
the HDR effect and leaving the surroundings untouched. That would set
off the tractor.

 

Heh, that area has spectacular pristine wildflower meadows, which you
can see in the background. Those only exist where a tractor has never
plowed, in the 400 years since the Spaniards arrived. That's the
foreboding I see in the picture!

 

So perhaps this is the sort of treatment you are talking about?
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC1007Mw.jpg >

 

That is out on Carrizo Plains, the Spring wild flowers there can be
spectacular.
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC0993w.jpg >
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC1021w.jpg >
Need I say, those are not HDR.

The real foreboding is the San Andreas Fault Zone running about 800 to
1000 yards behind the tractor, to the East of where I took the shot.

....and soon to the North of the National Monument, they will be
installing a massive solar power generation array.

 

On 2011-05-29 09:50:40 -0700, tony cooper <> said:

Here is one without the "dark and foreboding" sky.
....and I don't think "HDR enthusiasts" necessarily like those "dark and
foreboding skies."
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/MB-NHM-HDR-Comp.jpg >

Again there is certainly a time and place for HDR, it is just another
tool I enjoy tinkering with.

 

Norman Rockwell?

Regards,

Eric Stevens

 

That's much better. To me, the grass around the tractor is still too
bright. Tone that down, and you have a good photograph.

A question, though...is the real grass the bright green or what I
expect? I don't see real grass that is bright green like that, but
that may be because of what I'm used to seeing here in Florida.

 

I agree, That is a scene which always seems best in B&W, as does this one.
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HalfDome_0954BWcw.jpg >

I was Just using the Valley shot as an HDR demo. Now that I can,
whenever I am faced with a deep shadow and contrast situation as in
that shot, I shoot a bracketed set for non-HDR exposure selection, or
to play with HDR. That way I can do whatever I feel like once I get it
into my computer.

Over the years and the various trips up to Yosemite, I always try to
get a few shots from "Tunnel View" and various other spots up there so
that I can play Adams.

 

That was Spring after a particularly wet Winter when the hills are
almost radiant green. Three more weeks and you would be looking at
straw.