Would you say that this is HDR?

RuiMLopes

dlplumer

Yes

DonRicklin

Seems likely to me. Could also be false color IR at night.

Don

RuiMLopes

Thanks. Being so, I still need to improve my HDR PP adjustments aiming to turn it less evident...

DonRicklin

RuiMLopes wrote: »

Thanks. Being so, I still need to improve my HDR PP adjustments aiming to turn it less evident...

Nah, this is great! Non grunge HDR.... totally realistic, to me!

Don

karlabbott

This is a very well done HDR. I wouldn't get too hung up on the fact that a group of photographer's can determine that this is HDR Knowing about light enables one to tell when the range of light in a photo goes beyond the average 5 or so stops even if it's well executed, which in this case it is.

RuiMLopes

DonRicklin wrote: »

Nah, this is great! Non grunge HDR.... totally realistic, to me!

Don

karlabbott wrote: »

This is a very well done HDR. I wouldn't get too hung up on the fact that a group of photographer's can determine that this is HDR Knowing about light enables one to tell when the range of light in a photo goes beyond the average 5 or so stops even if it's well executed, which in this case it is.

Thank you guys! I´ll try to keep improving my "photomatix skills" anyway!

ghinson

If your goal is to have a pic look like it is not HDR, then light it to goal and shoot it as a single exposure.

There are millions of examples of garish HDR photos out there. But that is not, necessarily, what an HDR photo looks like.

Using Photomatix (or CS5 moreso these days) to better approximate what my eye saw in a scene is my goal. If I was standing there looking at this scene, my eye could see the detail in the foreground (steps and wall on the right), could refocus and see the shadow details in the statue, and then do the same for the background building.

To get that in my camera, I either have to be Joe McNally with speedlites positioned all over the place and wizards spilling out of my pockets, or I have to use three-letter badword: HDR.

rookieshooter

It is an HDR yes.

PilotBrad

I think by asking the question in the way that you did, the responses might have been skewed. In other words, by asking if a photo appears to be an HDR photo, you've given away the answer.

If you're trying to minimize obviousness of you HDR application, it might be more valuable to post a few pictures, some HDR and some not, and ask viewers to pick which photos they think are the HDR photos.

Just my $.02.

bhogle

PilotBrad wrote: »

I think by asking the question in the way that you did, the responses might have been skewed. In other words, by asking if a photo appears to be an HDR photo, you've given away the answer.

If you're trying to minimize obviousness of you HDR application, it might be more valuable to post a few pictures, some HDR and some not, and ask viewers to pick which photos they think are the HDR photos.

Just my $.02.

I agree with PilotBrad.

rookieshooter

FWIW I could tell it's an hdr by the halos. You can reduce those easily in Photomatix, assuming that is what you are using, by reducing strength and/or decreasing smoothing.

Numbers Guy

The building in the background told me it was HDR, but that doesn't mean it was poorly done. If you're looking for natural, try downloading a free copy of Enfuse GUI. I just ran across it this past week and was pretty impressed for such a simple tool. Play with the adjustments just a bit, and you may get what you're looking for.

RuiMLopes

ghinson wrote: »

If your goal is to have a pic look like it is not HDR, then light it to goal and shoot it as a single exposure.

There are millions of examples of garish HDR photos out there. But that is not, necessarily, what an HDR photo looks like.

Using Photomatix (or CS5 moreso these days) to better approximate what my eye saw in a scene is my goal. If I was standing there looking at this scene, my eye could see the detail in the foreground (steps and wall on the right), could refocus and see the shadow details in the statue, and then do the same for the background building.

To get that in my camera, I either have to be Joe McNally with speedlites positioned all over the place and wizards spilling out of my pockets, or I have to use three-letter badword: HDR.

rookieshooter wrote: »

It is an HDR yes.

PilotBrad wrote: »

I think by asking the question in the way that you did, the responses might have been skewed. In other words, by asking if a photo appears to be an HDR photo, you've given away the answer.

If you're trying to minimize obviousness of you HDR application, it might be more valuable to post a few pictures, some HDR and some not, and ask viewers to pick which photos they think are the HDR photos.

Just my $.02.

rookieshooter wrote: »

FWIW I could tell it's an hdr by the halos. You can reduce those easily in Photomatix, assuming that is what you are using, by reducing strength and/or decreasing smoothing.

Numbers Guy wrote: »

The building in the background told me it was HDR, but that doesn't mean it was poorly done. If you're looking for natural, try downloading a free copy of Enfuse GUI. I just ran across it this past week and was pretty impressed for such a simple tool. Play with the adjustments just a bit, and you may get what you're looking for.

bhogle wrote: »

I agree with PilotBrad.

Sorry for the late reply, but I´ve been out of the country the last days.
Yes, I also see it as an HDR but, more important to me, was to get your input and advice on how to reduce that evidence...
Thanks a lot to all of you!

daq7

Sure it looks HDR. Does it matter? It does not look extremely unnatural.

RuiMLopes

daq7 wrote: »

Sure it looks HDR. Does it matter? It does not look extremely unnatural.

Thanks forcommenting

PaulO

I'm also starting to look at how to get realistic HDR - mostly web research at this time (CS5 or Expose are looking more promising) and Yes - I do think this image has an HDR look, but less so than many. I would be thinking at making the following changes: darken right edge and perhaps the bottom a bit - no sense bringing light to parts that don't add value; increase the color temp of the background church (it is different than the rest of the image and it has that 'HDR' look more than the rest of the photo. Just my $.02.

RuiMLopes

PaulO wrote: »

I'm also starting to look at how to get realistic HDR - mostly web research at this time (CS5 or Expose are looking more promising) and Yes - I do think this image has an HDR look, but less so than many. I would be thinking at making the following changes: darken right edge and perhaps the bottom a bit - no sense bringing light to parts that don't add value; increase the color temp of the background church (it is different than the rest of the image and it has that 'HDR' look more than the rest of the photo. Just my $.02.

I´ll try to follow your (and other) advices later at home to see how it may work.
Thanks.