Ziggy, I am amazed by the discussions about HDR among photographers, while a brief stroll through an Art Museum will clearly demonstrate that painters have dealt with "tone=mapping" highlights and shadows to fit the dynamic range of oil on canvas ( which is vastly less than the dynamic range of highlights to shadows in the real world ) for centuries.....
Why is it so upsetting to photographers? I think, maybe, it is because for so long we were limited to "Kodachrome prints" in printed material for most of our lives. I love Kodachrome, but it handled shadow detail very poorly, as do most positive transparency films.
Ziggy, I am amazed by the discussions about HDR among photographers, while a brief stroll through an Art Museum will clearly demonstrate that painters have dealt with "tone=mapping" highlights and shadows to fit the dynamic range of oil on canvas ( which is vastly less than the dynamic range of highlights to shadows in the real world ) for centuries.....
Why is it so upsetting to photographers? I think, maybe, it is because for so long we were limited to "Kodachrome prints" in printed material for most of our lives. I love Kodachrome, but it handled shadow detail very poorly, as do most positive transparency films.
Perhaps its not so much an objection to the process itself but rather a reaction to how often it is "abused", overdone, etc. ? There are (or seem to be based on threads I've seen on a number of forums) those feel the same about any post processing of digital images, as if film was "pure" and unaltered once shot. Mostly I suppect because they have come into photography since the time of film or never worked a darkroom, whereas those who started when flim was the only option and did dark room work know we did just as much post-processing then as we do now in digital.
RM
http://roadrunes.com
"It's better to bite the hand that feeds you, than to feed the hand that bites you" - Me
Comments
Why is it so upsetting to photographers? I think, maybe, it is because for so long we were limited to "Kodachrome prints" in printed material for most of our lives. I love Kodachrome, but it handled shadow detail very poorly, as do most positive transparency films.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Perhaps its not so much an objection to the process itself but rather a reaction to how often it is "abused", overdone, etc. ? There are (or seem to be based on threads I've seen on a number of forums) those feel the same about any post processing of digital images, as if film was "pure" and unaltered once shot. Mostly I suppect because they have come into photography since the time of film or never worked a darkroom, whereas those who started when flim was the only option and did dark room work know we did just as much post-processing then as we do now in digital.
RM
"It's better to bite the hand that feeds you, than to feed the hand that bites you" - Me