Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

View Poll Results: What should be the fate of the HDR?
Death. Show no mercy. HDR needs to die. 72 31.58%
HDR is great photography. It shouldn't go. 156 68.42%
Voters: 228. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Sep 6, 2012, 11:38 AM   #51
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by mulo View Post
But but but!... I like lens flare!
Go watch a JJ Abrams movie then.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by iRCL View Post
For being in a digital photography forum, it's incredible how much completely wrong information is in this thread
Point some out.
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr
Geckotek is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 04:28 PM   #52
Blackberryroid
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: /private/var/vm/
Quote:
Originally Posted by iRCL View Post
For being in a digital photography forum, it's incredible how much completely wrong information is in this thread
This wasn't in the photography forum in the very beginning. Since the topic is HDR on the iPhone, I placed this thread on the iPhone forum. The first page is full of posts from the iPhone guys.
Blackberryroid is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 05:00 PM   #53
chrono1081
macrumors 604
 
chrono1081's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Isla Nublar
This has probably been said but if you know its HDR, the photographer did it wrong.

HDR can produce fantastic results, but many photogs don't really know what HDR does, how to correctly process HDR images, or how to made the effect subtle not overpowering.

I see soooo many horrid looking images people claim to be HDR (like this, no offense if you are the photog):



That have nasty haloing and uneven lighting. That is NOT correct HDR processing. Most of the times when you see this, its tone mapping not HDR.
__________________
Mac Pro (2010): 3.33Ghz Intel Xeon (6 core) - 24 GB RAM - NVidia Quadro k5000
Macbook Air (2010): 2.13 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo - 4GB RAM
chrono1081 is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 05:52 PM   #54
dmax35
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
For those of you not familiar with HDR, or in need of great informative topics related to HDR. Trey Ratcliff is a leading expert when is comes to shooting HDR.

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/
__________________
(2) 3.5 GHz New Mac Pro 6 Core - (3) Macbook Pro's- iPad Air x 3,i,ATV3. Beech King Air 350,P645+ Phase One IQ280, Nikon D800E, .
dmax35 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 06:53 PM   #55
nateo200
macrumors 68020
 
nateo200's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Rendering......
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrono1081 View Post
This has probably been said but if you know its HDR, the photographer did it wrong.

HDR can produce fantastic results, but many photogs don't really know what HDR does, how to correctly process HDR images, or how to made the effect subtle not overpowering.

I see soooo many horrid looking images people claim to be HDR (like this, no offense if you are the photog):

Image

That have nasty haloing and uneven lighting. That is NOT correct HDR processing. Most of the times when you see this, its tone mapping not HDR.
I actually like the look....If I could see the full resolution version i might see haloing or nasty blur but who's to say what is wrong and right in terms of looks? Maybe the photographer had exactly that look in mind...I read this thread and I found it very bothersome....the iPhone only users posted bogus definitions based on assumptions and people posted about how its over used, no one knows how to properly use it, etc...along with other effects like sharpening and contrast. Sometimes I like lots of sharpness or contrast...of course as said before everything in moderation is good sometimes I like looking at a heavy contrast picture...

sometimes I like looking at something that was obviously heavily sharpened...just depends on the content and the intent its trying to establish...

Now if I take a picture of say someones face and my intent is for it to be a basic portrait over sharpening and jacking up the contrast is a BAD idea, it'll reveal the imperfections of the persons skin...I especially find when I take pictures of older persons I go for a softer image with less contrast and they are generally more please....now if I am taking a picture of say a guy from an action movie and he's just out of combat, dirty, sweaty, and has a hardened "not so friendly" look, I might add a bit on contrast and sharpen up a bit to show his rough skin, the hairs off his face, his visible poors to emphasize the dramatic "raw" nature that the picture is meant to give off...I can't think of any specific movies where these two ideas show case predominantly but I know Ive seen movies where the close up on someone you can see where they shaved, their sweat, etc. and others look intensely soft with less detail on the skin its self (the latter of which is important for say a female model).
__________________
-15" rMBP 2.4/8/256/650M, FCP X, AE CS5.5, PS CS6
-USB3 180GB SSD, Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt
-iPhone 5c 32GB Blue and Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0
-Canon 550D, GoPro3 Black
nateo200 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 07:45 PM   #56
chrono1081
macrumors 604
 
chrono1081's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Isla Nublar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateo200 View Post
I actually like the look....If I could see the full resolution version i might see haloing or nasty blur but who's to say what is wrong and right in terms of looks? Maybe the photographer had exactly that look in mind...I read this thread and I found it very bothersome....the iPhone only users posted bogus definitions based on assumptions and people posted about how its over used, no one knows how to properly use it, etc...along with other effects like sharpening and contrast. Sometimes I like lots of sharpness or contrast...of course as said before everything in moderation is good sometimes I like looking at a heavy contrast picture...

sometimes I like looking at something that was obviously heavily sharpened...just depends on the content and the intent its trying to establish...

Now if I take a picture of say someones face and my intent is for it to be a basic portrait over sharpening and jacking up the contrast is a BAD idea, it'll reveal the imperfections of the persons skin...I especially find when I take pictures of older persons I go for a softer image with less contrast and they are generally more please....now if I am taking a picture of say a guy from an action movie and he's just out of combat, dirty, sweaty, and has a hardened "not so friendly" look, I might add a bit on contrast and sharpen up a bit to show his rough skin, the hairs off his face, his visible poors to emphasize the dramatic "raw" nature that the picture is meant to give off...I can't think of any specific movies where these two ideas show case predominantly but I know Ive seen movies where the close up on someone you can see where they shaved, their sweat, etc. and others look intensely soft with less detail on the skin its self (the latter of which is important for say a female model).
I understand what you are saying, and to a point art is subjective, but there are good ways to do something and bad ways. If you google "HDR Images" you will find a slew of bad ways.

Telling photogs that their pictures are good when in reality they're terrible (like the one I posted) isn't doing anyone any favors. Sure they may like the look (or say they like the look to cover up their lack of skill) but the pic isn't going to win any awards. Its sloppy with bad lighting. If your pic has bad lighting its pretty much a bad pic.

Here's what real (and well done, although it still looks a wee bit processed) HDR looks like:



The scene looks natural. There are still a wide array of light and dark tones but none (or very few) of the blacks are crushed or whites blown. There is still good contrast in the scene.
__________________
Mac Pro (2010): 3.33Ghz Intel Xeon (6 core) - 24 GB RAM - NVidia Quadro k5000
Macbook Air (2010): 2.13 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo - 4GB RAM

Last edited by chrono1081; Sep 6, 2012 at 07:58 PM.
chrono1081 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 07:56 PM   #57
Policar
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
HDR isn't inherently bad--it's been in common use for a long time and is a key component of the zone system (in which you take a 10-stop wide-dr black and white negative and, through dodging and burning techniques, get a contrasty print on a four-or-five-stop-at-best contrast paper). I have never seen an automated hdr photo I liked, though there's some recent hdr photography (and even the occasional use of a weak ND grad filter) that's very subtle and hand dodged and burned that looks good. The tone mapped stuff is all terrible, though. Gregory Crewdson's work is painterly but not bad in a hand-painted kind of way, so it's not all garbage.

Lens flares are great and really all lens aberrations can be used in a great way. Abrams overused them in Star Trek, but the theory behind their use was sound and they have a way of expanding depth and putting motion into the frame that is particularly suited to cinema. Chris Cunningham's use of lens flares is really awesome.

So yes...I have trashy taste!

Last edited by Policar; Sep 6, 2012 at 08:22 PM.
Policar is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 10:51 PM   #58
Blackberryroid
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: /private/var/vm/
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrono1081 View Post
This has probably been said but if you know its HDR, the photographer did it wrong.

HDR can produce fantastic results, but many photogs don't really know what HDR does, how to correctly process HDR images, or how to made the effect subtle not overpowering.

I see soooo many horrid looking images people claim to be HDR (like this, no offense if you are the photog):

Image

That have nasty haloing and uneven lighting. That is NOT correct HDR processing. Most of the times when you see this, its tone mapping not HDR.
How exactly is this wrong? The dark details are shown clearly and nothing is washed out due to brightness.
Blackberryroid is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2012, 10:59 PM   #59
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackberryroid View Post
How exactly is this wrong? The dark details are shown clearly and nothing is washed out due to brightness.
To start, stone pillars don't glow.
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr
Geckotek is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 02:25 AM   #60
joemod
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackberryroid View Post
How exactly is this wrong? The dark details are shown clearly and nothing is washed out due to brightness.
I don't think that this was the scene that a human eye was seeing. That's why it's not good HDR. Correct me if I am wrong but HDR's primary objective is to bypass the limited dynamic range of a camera compared to the human eye/brain and to create a picture as close as the scene perceived from the human eye/brain. Not to create something different and possibly flashy.
joemod is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 07:17 AM   #61
Fujiko7
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London UK
This recent post in the August POTD thread is my idea of what good HDR should be. Click below for image.

Quote:
Originally Posted by appie57 View Post
Although I dislike most of the times HDR pics, this doesn't mean it has no application or can be helpful at times. To practice, I took this church interior as a subject for a HDR exercise. After several try outs, I choose a 9 image HDR composite, steps of 0.3 EV, processed with NIK HDR Efex Pro 2.0 and fine-tuned with Aperture and other plugins, but no perspective correction.
Image
Laurenskerk, Rotterdam.
__________________
Flickr
MacBook Pro 16GB iPhone 5 iPad 2
Fujiko7 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 07:20 AM   #62
0dev
macrumors 68040
 
0dev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 127.0.0.1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackberryroid View Post
I like the HDR photography thing on the iPhone. And when I presented this HDR idea to the photographers, they hated it with disgust.



Personally, I think HDR is great for colors and details. I like lens flares too because it looks artistic.

I can't believe they rejected the idea of HDR. But since they're experts, I'm am sure I'm missing something.

What am I missing? Is HDR horrible for you or is it not? What about lens flares?
I always make sure to HDR my Instagram photos, tell them that
__________________
"What kind of arrogant ass would quote themselves in their signature?" -0dev
0dev is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 07:52 AM   #63
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0dev View Post
I always make sure to HDR my Instagram photos, tell them that
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr
Geckotek is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 08:22 AM   #64
h1r0ll3r
macrumors 68040
 
h1r0ll3r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Maryland
Personally I like the whole HDR thing. If done properly, it can produce some really vibrant images which is very nice. Whenever I try to do it, it produces some rather forgettable images that should never see the light of day. Whenever I get around to learning how to do it properly, I'll probably use it more often. But, I've seen some really great HDR pics so I think it's a great thing.
__________________
15" MBP iPad (3rd Gen) iPod Nano (6th Gen) & 160GB Classic ATV
Galaxy Note 2
h1r0ll3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 08:50 AM   #65
ankurshr
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
When you switch on HDR mode, the camera (be it iPhone / a point-or-shoot, or a DSLR) takes several pictures of the scene / subject using different exposures (opening of the lens) and then overlay them one on top of another to get the final picture. It works best with if the scene you are shooting has dark shadows and / or bright colors.

If you learn how to use this technique, you can definitely click some amazing shots.
Saying that you hate it is like saying depth-of-field is useless since you don't know how to use it.
ankurshr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 08:58 AM   #66
MagicWok
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Quote:
Originally Posted by sim667 View Post
Time and a place for HDR. Generally speaking I've found it very good for dramatic landscapes, but also very easy to push a bit too far.....

Examples im pleased with:

Image
Waxham Breakwater by simbojono, on Flickr

Image
Iceland in HDR by simbojono, on Flickr

But for some things its just not so good......

Image
glade 2012 HDR dance off by simbojono, on Flickr

Image
Untitled_HDR7 by simbojono, on Flickr
Not trying to be harsh, even in the examples you put as you prefer are pushing it too far. The second one has a dull and botched sky and the picture seems fudgy, and the first one has the highlights all blown-out.

But the last two are definitely examples of what people think HDR is, and why it has gotten a bad rep by some.

HDR should be subtle, unlike any of those photos.
__________________
Mac Pro, MBP & MBA.
iPad, iPhone & iPod Touch
= All my money belongs to
MagicWok is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 09:30 AM   #67
Geckotek
macrumors G3
 
Geckotek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NYC
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicWok View Post
Not trying to be harsh, even in the examples you put as you prefer are pushing it too far. The second one has a dull and botched sky and the picture seems fudgy, and the first one has the highlights all blown-out.

But the last two are definitely examples of what people think HDR is, and why it has gotten a bad rep by some.

HDR should be subtle, unlike any of those photos.
I was going to say the same thing earlier but bit my tongue.
__________________
Gecko Art | Facebook | flickr
Geckotek is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 12:00 PM   #68
VirtualRain
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Isn't anything that increases the dynamic range of the image fall within the realm of HDR? In it's simplest form, it's all about moving one part of the histogram to another. If this is accurate then a simple contrast adjustment to spread your histogram across the full range would be considered doing HDR. Adjustments to pull in shadows or highlights is similarly HDR work.

So in other words, if you're not doing HDR work (maximizing your use of the histogram) you're not doing it right?!
__________________
tools: nMP for photography, rMBP for working, iPad for surfing, iPhone for communicating, Mac Mini for entertaining
Canon tools: 5D Mark III 24-105L/70-300L/35L/50L/85L for capturing
VirtualRain is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 12:48 PM   #69
MacNut
macrumors P6
 
MacNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmax35 View Post
For those of you not familiar with HDR, or in need of great informative topics related to HDR. Trey Ratcliff is a leading expert when is comes to shooting HDR.

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/
To be fair I think people like Ratcliff are the ones that gave HDR a bad name and over do it.
MacNut is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 01:10 PM   #70
killerrobot
macrumors 68020
 
killerrobot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 127.0.0.1
I can't say I'm a fan of HDR photography. Everything (including links and photos in the thread) in my opinion look over saturated. I understand peoples' visions and wanting to dramatize the scene, but I think for the most part they over dramatize using this function. It reminds me of the awful trend of the black and white photos with color highlighting.
I know some like it, but I'd rather edit the photo in post and if I still don't get the shot I want, then I'll got out shooting for it again later.
__________________
Another day older and deeper in debt.
killerrobot is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 04:05 PM   #71
chrono1081
macrumors 604
 
chrono1081's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Isla Nublar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemod View Post
I don't think that this was the scene that a human eye was seeing. That's why it's not good HDR. Correct me if I am wrong but HDR's primary objective is to bypass the limited dynamic range of a camera compared to the human eye/brain and to create a picture as close as the scene perceived from the human eye/brain. Not to create something different and possibly flashy.
You are correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fujiko7 View Post
This recent post in the August POTD thread is my idea of what good HDR should be. Click below for image.


Image
Laurenskerk, Rotterdam.
Fantastic example! Also a very lovely shot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicWok View Post
Not trying to be harsh, even in the examples you put as you prefer are pushing it too far. The second one has a dull and botched sky and the picture seems fudgy, and the first one has the highlights all blown-out.

But the last two are definitely examples of what people think HDR is, and why it has gotten a bad rep by some.

HDR should be subtle, unlike any of those photos.
I agree they were pushed way to far. Those images were most likely tone mapped vs HDRd.

I swear that I had an excellent HDR book laying around somewhere in my mess of books but I can't seem to find it. I was going to look for it to post for others
__________________
Mac Pro (2010): 3.33Ghz Intel Xeon (6 core) - 24 GB RAM - NVidia Quadro k5000
Macbook Air (2010): 2.13 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo - 4GB RAM
chrono1081 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 04:36 PM   #72
Firelock
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Dallas, Texas
Tone Mapping, HDR, and exposure bracketing

As others have pointed out, tone mapping and HDR are two different things. HDR is merely an automated way to do exposure bracketing. Photographers including myself still use the exposure bracketing technique all the time, particularly in studio set ups where you can lock the position of your camera. I am also a retoucher and can tell you that despite the advent of HDR, exposure bracketing is still alive an well. The photographers who send me work use it all the time.
Firelock is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 07:41 PM   #73
nateo200
macrumors 68020
 
nateo200's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Rendering......
http://www.grindtv.com/outdoor/blog/...ctrical+storm/

That looks very cool....I don't know how you can look at that and bitch about the lens flare or it looking stupid..
__________________
-15" rMBP 2.4/8/256/650M, FCP X, AE CS5.5, PS CS6
-USB3 180GB SSD, Intensity Shuttle Thunderbolt
-iPhone 5c 32GB Blue and Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0
-Canon 550D, GoPro3 Black
nateo200 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 08:41 PM   #74
Prodo123
macrumors 68020
 
Prodo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
I will only vote when the choice "HDR is only great when done correctly" is available; otherwise, meh.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" 2.2Ghz hi-res glossy, 16GB RAM, Logitech G700, Das Keyboard, Seagate Momentus XT 750GB iPhone 5 White 32GB Audiophile Photographer, videographer, audio engineer
Prodo123 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2012, 10:42 PM   #75
dazed
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Done right its a great tool. unfortunetly like lens flare, its over used and used by people who shouldn't be allowed near it.

Not fair blaming the functionality when its the moron using it thats to blame.
dazed is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do you think Facebook will "die" in the coming years, if so how? Viantef Community Discussion 28 Sep 13, 2013 07:57 PM
[iOS] Star Drop: Like "Bust-A-Move" except different and probably a lot worse. bruteforcegames iPhone and iPod touch Apps 0 Feb 11, 2013 12:20 AM
Delete "other" data and lens flare. Duff-Man02 iPhone 1 Dec 12, 2012 02:17 PM
iPhone5 Camera Purple Lens Flare "Fixed" Boxcar Edit iPhone 3 Oct 17, 2012 06:32 PM
13" pro with worse screen than air? sbb155 MacBook Pro 0 Jun 11, 2012 05:51 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:21 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC