Hdr

[clusty]

I am not much of a HDR expert, but I guess the classic subject for a HDR image would be sunrise/sunset.

[Alex Wilson]

HDR is only really useful if the dynamic range of the image can't be captured in a single exposure.

So, the typical successful HDR images are landscapes (with a large tonal difference between the sky and ground), interior images (churches are good candidates, where you get a range between the bright stained-glass and the darker interior areas), night-time cityscapes (lots of range between the bright lights from buildings/cars and the darker areas).

True (multi-image) HDR portraits are pretty much impossible since people would move between shots, though you could alway composite an HDR background with the person. Not to mention that the increased contrast of HDR is very unflattering to the skin tones.

If you like the re-contrasted look of HDR images, but you have just a single image that already has the full range, you can still use HDR processing on it, but you can pretty much get an identical result using the Shadows and Highlights tool in Photoshop, or anything other processing that increases local contrast (link to a PS action I made that does the same thing with layers).

[Travis]

HDR is only really useful if the dynamic range of the image can't be captured in a single exposure.

So, the typical successful HDR images are landscapes (with a large tonal difference between the sky and ground), interior images (churches are good candidates, where you get a range between the bright stained-glass and the darker interior areas), night-time cityscapes (lots of range between the bright lights from buildings/cars and the darker areas).

True (multi-image) HDR portraits are pretty much impossible since people would move between shots, though you could alway composite an HDR background with the person. Not to mention that the increased contrast of HDR is very unflattering to the skin tones.

If you like the re-contrasted look of HDR images, but you have just a single image that already has the full range, you can still use HDR processing on it, but you can pretty much get an identical result using the Shadows and Highlights tool in Photoshop, or anything other processing that increases local contrast (link to a PS action I made that does the same thing with layers).

thanks alex

[tegan]

I would also add that HDR is only ONE method of getting detail and tone and even the HDR\illustration look does not fit all landscapes.

A neutral grad filter on the camera will often do the same thing and yet give a more natural look to the photo as a bonus. The dynamic range optimizer or variations thereof on individual cameras will also produce greater detail in shadow and highlight areas.

Increasing contrast by the way, reduces the tonal gradation and the detail in the darker tones, so that is not be recommended either in colour or black and white. It also washes out the brighter tones.

Tegan

[Travis]

Thank you everyone.....

I know that HDR is kinda overdone but wanted to give it a try for learning purposes....

It rained all weekend here and I was not afforded any decent landscapes shots to try... maybe next weekend...

[Alex Wilson]

Increasing contrast by the way, reduces the tonal gradation and the detail in the darker tones, so that is not be recommended either in colour or black and white. It also washes out the brighter tones.
Tegan

HDR, though, just increases *local* contrast, so it does the opposite.

[tegan]

HDR, though, just increases *local* contrast, so it does the opposite.

Sorry, I did not mean to suggest that HDR is not to be recommended but rather the general notion of increasing contrast.

Tegan