Sure, here are some examples from photographers I've spoken with a bit so I have some insight into their methods.
I talked with this real estate photographer online and his method involves careful lighting (with both hot lights and strobes), waiting for good light at the end of the day, shooting multiple exposures on a tech camera, and then doing hdr and digital dodging and burning:
http://christopherbarrett.net
Maybe he'll find this link here and be flattered (or upset that I got his methods wrong, I hope not)... It's not all "art" and I like the commercial stuff better than the personal stuff (which is also nice) but at worst it's very elegant and excellent craft with good lighting, nice compositions, technical precision, and good subtle use of HDR. Really nice.
For landscape, where you can wait for the best light, I prefer low dynamic range images because you can print with more contrast than the scene originally had and use dodging and burning to increase, rather than compensate for, the original amount of contrast; particularly with color images I find this looks nice. I talked with this landscape photographer, and he told me that his style is a low dynamic range image, 4x5 velvia generally with a pretty long exposure and very deep stop, and normal and slight telephoto only. He chases storms to get good light at the end of the day and stormclouds. He dodges and burns extensively digitally from drum scans. I am very fond of his style as compared with other recent color landscape photography, and prefer his work with longer lenses, simpler compositions, etc. to the near/far style stuff with an obvious foreground:
http://www.robertturnerphoto.com/gallery/
I strongly dislike all of Trey Ratcliffe's photography.
I talked with this real estate photographer online and his method involves careful lighting (with both hot lights and strobes), waiting for good light at the end of the day, shooting multiple exposures on a tech camera, and then doing hdr and digital dodging and burning:
http://christopherbarrett.net
Maybe he'll find this link here and be flattered (or upset that I got his methods wrong, I hope not)... It's not all "art" and I like the commercial stuff better than the personal stuff (which is also nice) but at worst it's very elegant and excellent craft with good lighting, nice compositions, technical precision, and good subtle use of HDR. Really nice.
For landscape, where you can wait for the best light, I prefer low dynamic range images because you can print with more contrast than the scene originally had and use dodging and burning to increase, rather than compensate for, the original amount of contrast; particularly with color images I find this looks nice. I talked with this landscape photographer, and he told me that his style is a low dynamic range image, 4x5 velvia generally with a pretty long exposure and very deep stop, and normal and slight telephoto only. He chases storms to get good light at the end of the day and stormclouds. He dodges and burns extensively digitally from drum scans. I am very fond of his style as compared with other recent color landscape photography, and prefer his work with longer lenses, simpler compositions, etc. to the near/far style stuff with an obvious foreground:
http://www.robertturnerphoto.com/gallery/
I strongly dislike all of Trey Ratcliffe's photography.
Last edited: