HDR photography

[Quick281]

Hell yeah! Keep those comin!

[marko138]

Originally Posted by Dova80

Here is another one

Looks great.

[Katana-750_lady]

Here is my attempt ... unfortunately, I can't find the original

[fasternyou929]

Wow, no way I'm going through 25 pages, so pardon me if this is a repeat question. Is HDR a camera application? Or is it software that can be used on any original? If it's the latter, I've got some high res pictures of the Great Wall and I'd like to see what can be done with them.

[Archren]

Originally Posted by fasternyou929

Wow, no way I'm going through 25 pages, so pardon me if this is a repeat question. Is HDR a camera application? Or is it software that can be used on any original? If it's the latter, I've got some high res pictures of the Great Wall and I'd like to see what can be done with them.

Google is your friend...

In short.. traditional HDR is when one takes multiple exposures of the same shot and then blends them using something like photoshop or photomatix.

Pseudo-HDR is accomplished by taking any picture and creating multiple exposures from that image and then blending them using photoshop.

Obviously traditional HDR requires a still shot and probably a tripod.. Pseudo-HDR (I think) isn't as good a quality, but gets similar results.

But it's computer based software, not something that occurs on the camera.

[AquaPython]

if you provide a real HDR image that is decent, and then try to use it in a pseudo program, will it make it betteR?

[Archren]

Originally Posted by AquaPython

if you provide a real HDR image that is decent, and then try to use it in a pseudo program, will it make it betteR?

Depends on what you're going for. You can get a lot of different looks with traditional and pseudo-HDR depending how how you adjust the settings.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by AquaPython

if you provide a real HDR image that is decent, and then try to use it in a pseudo program, will it make it betteR?

Depends on what you think "better" is. I tend to think that good HDR tends to look like a regular image, but with more pop. A lot of people push their stuff to the point that it looks cartoonish, which just looks bad to me. The last two images posted in this thread, to me, look good.

[Mr Lefty]

Originally Posted by fasternyou929

Wow, no way I'm going through 25 pages, so pardon me if this is a repeat question. Is HDR a camera application? Or is it software that can be used on any original? If it's the latter, I've got some high res pictures of the Great Wall and I'd like to see what can be done with them.

a lot of that 25 pages is photos... but it's explained on the first page or two


HDR is a High Dynamic Range... you take 3+ exposures, and merge them together... by doing so you get the details in the highlights (from the darkest image) and details in the shadows (from the brightest image)

[Katana-750_lady]

Originally Posted by ebbs15

a lot of that 25 pages is photos... but it's explained on the first page or two


HDR is a High Dynamic Range... you take 3+ exposures, and merge them together... by doing so you get the details in the highlights (from the darkest image) and details in the shadows (from the brightest image)

Thank you for that eexplanation I am a novice at photography ...

SO .. opinion on the Nikon D60?