The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun Pictures with Sony . . . .

kuau

Workshop Member
Another try at it

OK here is the same image blended 2 exposures only. Do they still look to "hdr"?
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Jono,
The first time I read about HDR, at LL I think, it was described in a similar way to what you do. The "artistic" aspect is something that has entered the stage later. Used in a sober manner, it's probably a great tool, particularly for landscape photography. One of the problems with digital photography though, is that we sometimes tend to look for the spectacular rather than improving the way we take photos. That's just the nature of the beast, I suppose, the human beast that is :)
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Kuau
No, they don't look 'HDR' anymore . . . much improved, and with a little crackle back in 'em.

Jorgen
Cheap thrills is one thing . . and we both subscribe to them :p

As far as 'HDR' is concerned, I think it did start as a 'digital' dodge and burn, and I have no complaints. My problem is with programs which try to make your image for you, and the current crop of HDR programs seem to me to be unremittingly horrible!

I'm not a luddite - I always use stitching software for panoramas (it's much better at it than I am). But to hand over your lovely image to some software which is going to work out a high dynamic range version on the basis of some algorithm or another . . I don't think so!

As for handing your picture over to a piece of software to make it 'artistic' :wtf:
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jono,
One of the problems with digital photography though, is that we sometimes tend to look for the spectacular rather than improving the way we take photos. That's just the nature of the beast, I suppose, the human beast that is :)
I think this deserves a separate answer. It's something I battle with every day. My black and white landscapes are definitely a cop out, and whilst lots of people say oooh, and, indeed, aaah, it's hard to resist, but it leaves a slightly soiled feeling somewhere. On the other hand, I'm not pleased with my own photography, so, if someone else likes it . . .

As far as post processing is concerned, I have a kind of rule (which I often disobey) which states that you mustn't do any post processing which you didn't think of when you took the picture. The black and white cloud with the vapour trail was a case in point - it may not be grand, but when I took it I knew exactly what I was going to do with it, so, at least, it wasn't either an accident, or a rescue job.

On the other hand, if it's liked . . . does it matter whether it's an accident . . or a rescue job?

This is deep water, and the two options seem to be to open another bottle of wine . . or go to bed!:eek:

Goodnight!
:)
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Good morning!

Sometimes, when I see really extreme HDR, like this one:

http://ramdisk.smugmug.com/gallery/7403403_9NLYD#497256127_BDtb2

I ask myself: would I have liked this one if it was a painting? Sometimes I would, and sometimes, it's important to remember that photography can be many different kinds of art, just like oil paintings and watercolours are different kind of paintings.

The really interesting part is, when all this technology is linked to real talent, and inspiration from the real masters of visual arts. That is when we get to see the exceptional images that are available in these forums sometimes.

Yes, these are deep waters, and unfortunately, the time of day doesn't allow for anything but a cup of oolong tea :angel:
 

jonoslack

Active member
I ask myself: would I have liked this one if it was a painting? Sometimes I would, and sometimes, it's important to remember that photography can be many different kinds of art, just like oil paintings and watercolours are different kind of paintings.
Oh, I quite agree - I'm not doctrinaire about this, only complaining about handing over the responsibility for one's photographs to a piece of software . I'm right up for 'using' the software :) I and revert to my original feeling, which is that if it's 'interesting' then nobody cares about the technicalities, and if it isn't, then nobody cares at all.

For 'interesting' you can substitute 'artistic' or 'eye catching' or any other positive expression.

Personally, I shot you linked to is horrible - but then, I'm just a grumpy old man :cussing: :lecture: :angry: :cry: :ROTFL:
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Red Rock Crossing in Sedona AZ, 5 exposures I hope it doesn't look to HDR, still have some work to do on it. A900 CZ 16=35mm F10
Converted in DxO then merged in PhotoMatix. I know HDR poo poo. I looked at all 5exposures of this image and I can't get just one to look right.
Hey Kuau... thanks for posting.

A word about intent, if you don't mind... especially seeing your replies.

One thing, I think, that Jono is getting at is that intention is key in photography (IMO). Looking at your original shot, and then the reprocessed version, I can only say a few things... (1) they are different and (2) my opinion of which way they should be processed is just that... my opinion.

If, by chance, you find that the HDR "look" is compelling to you, then it's your prerogative to find your voice using that as an artistic tool. We all have our bents... some of us like getting it "right in the camera" while others like "flatness" in-camera with an eye towards post-production.

So... I'll add that I think you should push these shots in a direction that you derive the greatest artistic satisfaction from. We have such a great wealth of latitude with our files these days, and I for one find the endless possibilities available both in the field and in front of a computer really fascinating.

If it matters... although it's HDR'd like crazy... I like the first shot you posted as much as the re-process, but I wonder what the first version would look like in b/w with a bit more localized dodging and burning to bring focus to the major compositional elements.

If there's one thing about HDR that I don't like... and I like HDR... is that it can really homogenize the scene from a contrast level that makes it difficult to discern what is compositionally important.

Thanks:D
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Personally, I shot you linked to is horrible - but then, I'm just a grumpy old man :cussing: :lecture: :angry: :cry: :ROTFL:
Taste is more individual than we can imagine sometimes. I had lunch with three very young and very pretty girls today, and the only photos that are good enough for their taste are photos of themselves, preferably taken with a camera phone. So much for all our discussions about lenses, aperture and pixels :ROTFL: :ROTFL: :ROTFL:
 

edwardkaraa

New member
Taste is more individual than we can imagine sometimes. I had lunch with three very young and very pretty girls today, and the only photos that are good enough for their taste are photos of themselves, preferably taken with a camera phone. So much for all our discussions about lenses, aperture and pixels :ROTFL: :ROTFL: :ROTFL:
It has been the trend here in Thailand for young girls to be both the photographer and the model in the same time, with the latest mobile phone cameras. Who needs a photographer when you can do it by yourself? I hope this trend doesn't expand to other areas :ROTFL:
 

edwardkaraa

New member
Other areas? Are there other areas :confused: You mean, except for handing out moneys in generous quantities? I must be missing out on something here... I wonder what :rolleyes:
That never crossed my mind, Jorgen. But now that you mentioned it :D

What I meant is that, now that the girls are self-sufficient in the photography area (not needing external help), I hoped that the do it yourself trend doesn't spill on other aspects of human behaviour :ROTFL:
 

edwardkaraa

New member
Albert, your group shots are simply amazing. Every person seems to have the perfect expression, and no eye blinking. Every time I tried that, I always had at least 2-3 persons blinking no matter how I tried.
 

APY_JR

New member
Albert, your group shots are simply amazing. Every person seems to have the perfect expression, and no eye blinking. Every time I tried that, I always had at least 2-3 persons blinking no matter how I tried.
Thanks Edward!

It happens... I take two or 3 shots... the middle girl in the green (keeper) had her eyes closed on the first shot so I cloned her eyes in from the second shot:)

Still havin' fun,

Albert
 

kuau

Workshop Member
Grand Falls, Arizona
I am sill awaiting my CZ 24-70mm lens. Wish I had it yesterday..
This image was taken with an old minolta 35-70mm F4 lens at F11 not bad.
Steven
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
First real gig with the a900 - engagement session.

a900-Sigma 50/1.4

 

dhsimmonds

New member
Great images Steven and Shelby.

Steven how I envy you having these great locations right on you doorstep so to speak. We were there in Arizona last year and really enjoyed the whole region. A photo at every turn. Must return with the a900 one day.

Shelby you are really getting to grips with the a900 and Sigma 50/1.4.
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Sorry if a bit Lazy, marc :ROTFL:, but I snapped this on the way home today.

Still trying to figure out good web sharpening for the a900

 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
Let me start by saying these are not great art - I'm still delighting in the extraordinary resolution of the 70-400 G and as I was an hour early for a dental appointment today, I went to a local park to "waste" the time...

Both shots hand-held at f8, ISO 320, processed in CI with default settings except +10 contrast and +10 saturation. The second shot is a 100% crop.

Love that lens!

Bill
 
Last edited:
Top