The Debate Over HDR
Submitted by mitch on Mon, 02/15/2010 - 22:35.
Dave Cross says:
"I'm going to be honest and say that I'm not a fan of the highly processed/bordering on fantasy style of HDR. Honestly, to me maybe one out of 10 photos looks good with that highly-processed look. Maybe I'm just seeing too much of it? I'm not sure."
I tend to agree with Dave, How about you? Read more of Dave's comments with the link to his blog below:
Scott Kelby Chimes In
http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2010/archives/8479
Lauren Chimes In
Gee... some people will do anything to put themselves in the same discussion with Dave Cross and Scott Kelby. Somehow I really don't think I made it. But I do think HDR has become too faddish; to "in;" too vogue.
That said, I use it.. when I need to! You can call it HDR or FDR; I prefer to call it "EDR." Extended Dynamic Range. If I want more detail in a photograph I turn to multiple exposures. But I don't want anyone to say, "That's HDR!" I want them to say, "That photograph has a lot of really nice detail."
Lauren
Full disclosure. I've never
Full disclosure. I've never done an HDR image.
Most of the HDR images that I see on Flickr that make me cringe are HDR implemented poorly/in excess...or overprocessed tone mapping. The best HDR are the ones where you have little idea it was processed that one.
I find some people WAAAAAY overdo the HDR just as some people overdo it with clarity.