2 ms·
Does anyone else find HDR produces generally ghastly results? I find it gimmicky, and I've yet to see someone use in a way that didn't completely take me out of
by paulsmith 16y ago
Does anyone else find HDR produces generally ghastly results? I find it gimmicky, and I've yet to see someone use in a way that didn't completely take me out of the viewing experience.
- DougBTX 16y agoI'm guessing confirmation bias - if you were to see an HRD photo which wasn't ghastly, you wouldn't guess that it is HRD. Hence, thinking that there no non-ghastly HDR photos. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Grand_Canyon_HDR_imaging.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Grand_Canyon_HDR_imaging.j... Or better, one photo, 9 exposures: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StPauls_cathedral_tonemapped.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StPauls_cathedral_tonemapp...
- StavrosK 16y agoThe St. Paul's photo is the best example I've seen so far of HDR done right.
- mortenjorck 16y agoAs with any photographic technique, the technique alone doesn't guarantee anything. A good photographer will use the technique as a means to an end, while to a less skilled one the technique may simply be the end in and of itself.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- makeramen 16y agohere's an example (video) where the results are not so obviously "gimmicky" and definitely enhance the viewing experience: http://vimeo.com/12828140 http://vimeo.com/12828140