My first attempt at HDR, abuse welcome

Farmlife

It's an area of photography i have a good interest in, so would love a few pointers if anyone can help

magicbastarder

it doesn't look very HDR; it's actually quite lacking in contrast.

however, the framing is a bit tight; the poles in the left foreground being chopped at the top and bottom is slightly offputting, but the biggest issue you have is that it just looks like a snapshot of a building.

pullandbang

As a HDR it didn't work....phew!

nicknackgtb

red is all i see

Hugh_C

Trash/Recycle is down there

---

⬇

Farmlife

There's something about it i like, probably because it's just my first shot at layering 3 shots through photomatix, ok then, i guess its back to the drawingboard
Dose anyone know of photo walks or clubs that concentrate on hdr stuff?

5uspect

Farmlife wrote: »

There's something about it i like, probably because it's just my first shot at layering 3 shots through photomatix, ok then, i guess its back to the drawingboard
Dose anyone know of photo walks or clubs that concentrate on hdr stuff?

Te be pretty blunt, most HDR is ****e and you shouldn't waste your time with it. Over the top HDR and aggressive tone mapping is often technical wankery at the expense of actual photography. It's become a crutch for a lot of people more interested in the technology rather than anything else and you're unlikely to find an actual photography club that focuses on it. It's just another tool in the box, not a photographic revolution.

If a scene has a particularly large dynamic range (the example you posted doesn't), and you don't have a few ND grad filters, or the lighting is too complex, or your camera's RAW files lack the DR then HDR is a useful technique to capture detail otherwise lost.

What interests you about HDR? Do you know what HDR is about or is it just a thing you heard about and want to try out? You might find this interesting:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm
Should explain what HDR is about and when you should use it.

Nebezpeci Mys

Imho, i don't think that this scene lends itself to hdr. I also think that you will need to deal with ghosting, which is caused by moving objects, i.e. the moving people. Of course, unless you intended to have them there deliberately. Usually, it can be looked after by Photomatix at the time of the photomerge, but more pronounced ghosting will have to be taken care of in further pp.

You might want to have a look for 'Complete Guide to High Dynamic Range' by Ferrell McCollough. It explains everything about HDR and is a really good source of info. Have fun!

Farmlife

I'm not sure what it is about hdr that captures my eye, my work revolves around portraits so it's a a bit of an escape from photographing people, and traditional landscape photography doesn't really interest me.

I'v followed some of Trey Ratcliff's work and i like his style

Nebezpeci Mys

Farmlife wrote: »

I'm not sure what it is about hdr that captures my eye, my work revolves around portraits so it's a a bit of an escape from photographing people, and traditional landscape photography doesn't really interest me.

I'v followed some of Trey Ratcliff's work and i like his style

Nothing wrong with exploring & using HDR in your photography, but to do it right one needs to learn where & when to use it.

Stephen P

I found myself over the last year or so taking nearly every landscapes/cityscape shot with HDR in mind as I like the style. Then recently I decided to put a stop to it and I'm trying to get back to traditional photography. I found it difficult to get out of the habit of taking 3 or more shots at different exposures. Maybe it's something newbies like to explore, I'm relatively new to photography (4 years) and still learning and making mistakes.
It's looks like the preset you used on the photo is the Photographic preset which IMO doesn't give the image the HDR effect, it's lacking contrast and clarity.

Best of luck with it anyway

magicbastarder

judging by the scene, there's not much need for HDR anyway; the lighting doesn't look very challenging.

Judge

HDR stands for High Dynamic Range. The dynamic range refers to the difference between what is needed to correctly expose the brightest part of a composition and what is needed to expose the darkest part. In some cases the dynamic range is so great it is impossible to expose your camera (or in some extreme cases our own eyes) in such a way as to capture the lightest and darkest elements correctly.

For example, if you attempt to photograph a narrow street with high buildings on both sides in a low sun, you may find you cannot expose for the side of the street bathed in sunlight without losing the detail of the side of the street in the shadows – in some extreme cases the shady side may come out as a totally black silhouette. Conversely, if you expose for the side of the street in the shade, the side in the sun becomes overexposed, in some cases totally "blown out" to pure white. A situation like this is ideal for HDR because the dynamic range you are trying to capture (the difference between the bright and shaded sides of the street) is so great.

The photograph you have posted appears to have been taken in the middle of the day in overcast conditions. In these circumstances the light is so diffuse that the contrast between the light and dark parts of the picture is such that HDR is not needed – you can easily capture the full dynamic range in a single exposure. In addition, the lack of contrast between the highlights and the shadows means the image looks flat and lifeless. This is why most successful landscape and cityscape images are taken around sunrise and sunset: you get much greater contrast in the image and also the colour of the light is at its best.

So, for starters, you will need to find places where you can find these high dynamic ranges. A good place to start is to see if you can find and shoot the interior of an old church. The dynamic range needed to capture the windows, including any stained glass windows, and to capture any details in the stonework in the shadows, especially the roof and the sides of the building, is such that HDR is often the only solution. I personally find HDR images of these types of building interiors to be among the most effective. Don’t forget to bring a tripod.

Finally, you also need to work on your composition. It's not just the poor lighting that makes your picture look flat. Remember: the world is 3-dimensional but photographs are 2-dimensional so you have to trick the brain into seeing three dimensions in your pictures. You do this partially by using good light: shadows and highlights are one of the ways our minds perceive depth. The other way is good composition: landscapes and cityscapes need a foreground, middleground and background to give them the illusion they are in three dimensions.

In your picture you have some foreground thanks to the red poles but because you've cut off the bottom of the nearest one, you can't tell where it is standing in relation to the building behind, which means the foreground is unable to provide enough cues as to the depth of the scene. Note also the patterns on the pavement: there are excellent opportunities to use leading lines to create depth if you can position yourself in the right place.

Now, take a look at this HDR photograph (not by me) of the same location:


Bord Gais Energy Theatre | Dublin, Ireland by Mark Desmond, on Flickr

Note the following:
- It's taken in much better light and the photographer is using the artificial lighting to great effect to add colour to the scene (all three primary colours – red, blue and yellow are present);
- The photographer has also positioned his camera in a more interesting location, which accentuates the interesting angular shape of the building;
- The leading lines created by the paving add depth and make the image 3-dimensional;
- The positioning of the poles (left) and the blue structure (right) in the middleground also add to the sense of depth;
- Finally, note that the HDR treatment is not too excessive; the photographer has pulled a lot of detail out of the highlights and shadows but there is still enough contrast left in the scene to give it depth.

pullandbang

Ask yourself, do you really want to produce awful sh1te like this?

Unfortunately the Urbex community is plagued with it.

KevHos

awww we all fall down the HDR hole, don't worry won't be long before you leave the over processed shmuck

Splinters

pullandbang wrote: »

Ask yourself, do you really want to produce awful sh1te like this?

That hurt my eyes.

Brian

@Judge the three primary colours are Red, Green and Blue. Yellow is a secondary/complementary along with Cyan and Magenta.