Friday, November 21, 2008


I see lots of HDR images on Flickr. Some of them are great; subtle blending of carefully chosen images to gain a wider exposure range than the camera can normally handle - done well, they should look pretty much like how the eye sees dynamic range (ca. 12 stops) rather than the usual 4-6 stops of digital sensors.

Some of them are total shit. I mean, really freaky looking, and used in circumstances where the contrast range wouldn't be that wide, so they end up looking like high saturation, low contrast crap. Pointless.

I have posted three images, none of them (repeat NONE OF THEM) mine, but all described as HDR on Flickr. I think these are all at the Good end of the spectrum, but I have my fave, and for a reason. Which is your fave, and why, in the context of what you think about HDR images.

I sometimes blend two tiffs (derived from separate workings of the same RAW file) together, to achieve a more natural exposure, but I've never tried - or felt the need - for HDR. CS doesn't do HDR, but I know later versions do.

Have you guys tried this, and, if so, what do you think? Do you have any HDR images to post? If not, what blending techniques do you use?



1 comment:

Damian Lidgard said...

In the context of HDR, I would have to choose #2. It seems the image has all tones covered from light to dark with no obvious abnormalities. Well, there is an area of brightness on the building in the foreground but not sure if that is abnormal or not. Anyway, the image itself creates a real sense of vastness and the dynamic range of the light adds to that.