HDR photography
HDR photography
From Wiki: high dynamic range imaging (HDRI) is a set of techniques that allows a far greater dynamic range of exposures (i.e. a large range of values between light and dark areas) than normal digital imaging techniques. The intention of HDRI is to accurately represent the wide range of intensity levels found in real scenes ranging from direct sunlight to the deepest shadows.
The interesting thing with HDR is it’s only possible with digital material. It really is a new step in the constantly evolving world of photography.
It led me to think about the very definition of photography as it will be ten years from now on. I believe for most people, “noble” photography, if it makes senses, implies rolls of film, darkrooms and chemicals. Why? Probably because of “the hand of the artist”.
Nowadays, digital equipments have become available to the unwashed masses. Film photography will become marginal but will never disappear (like vinyl records). Photography and digital art will increasingly become intertwined and soon, new generations that have never even used disposable cameras will think they are one and the same.
The concept of photography as film photography will die with its supporters. Is it a good thing? I have no idea. I’m merely stating a fact.
Be that as it may, here are some HDR “images”:
And for something different
The interesting thing with HDR is it’s only possible with digital material. It really is a new step in the constantly evolving world of photography.
It led me to think about the very definition of photography as it will be ten years from now on. I believe for most people, “noble” photography, if it makes senses, implies rolls of film, darkrooms and chemicals. Why? Probably because of “the hand of the artist”.
Nowadays, digital equipments have become available to the unwashed masses. Film photography will become marginal but will never disappear (like vinyl records). Photography and digital art will increasingly become intertwined and soon, new generations that have never even used disposable cameras will think they are one and the same.
The concept of photography as film photography will die with its supporters. Is it a good thing? I have no idea. I’m merely stating a fact.
Be that as it may, here are some HDR “images”:
And for something different
- With The Grain
- Gillette Aficionado
- Posts: 1832
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Yup, it’s typically HDR. Here’s a great portfolio of a HDR master. You’ll get a better idea of what it’s supposed to look like.
You have to take multiple exposures of the same scene and then generate an HDR image with a dedicated software, Photomatix being the best in my opinion. You’ll find a great tutorial here: http://stuckincustoms.com/2006/06/06/548/ScottS wrote:How do you acquire HDR photos?
- rustyblade
- Shaving Paparazzo
- Posts: 10472
- Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:27 pm
- Location: Ontario
- Trumperman
- Bill Extraordinaire
- Posts: 2893
- Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:17 pm
- Location: Charlotte, NC
- fallingwickets
- Clive the Thumb
- Posts: 8813
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:59 am
Thank you all for the positive feedback. Damn, I kind of hoped my post would trigger a debate about film vs digital photography. Many of us like traditional, sometimes “old-world”, antiquated paraphernalia, and I would have been curious to read what they thought of modern photography (and I’m in no way implying they are anti-modern).
Last instalment of the Small French Village series.
Last instalment of the Small French Village series.
- rustyblade
- Shaving Paparazzo
- Posts: 10472
- Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:27 pm
- Location: Ontario
You have the eye, Richard, that’s the most important requirement for photography. Just practise, practise and practise. Do you know that it’s actually your SOTD photographs about a year ago that made me dust off the D70 and buy a macro lens? Without those shaving boards, there are some aspects of my life that would be radically different. I would be shaving probably with a Fusion and Nivea foam, I would have made no progress in photography, I would still be wearing department store edt, etc. These past few months greatly changed my way of life.
Which part is it you don’t like? The fact you don’t have a physical contact with rolls? The smell of chemicals? The “hand of the artist”? Does it lack something (what is “soul”?) or does it bring something you dislike (immediacy, bits, sRGB, etc.)? I have a friend who holds views similar to yours, minus the hatred.
Hi Yukio -
I have been really impressed with your photography, and I thank you for the images you have shared with us.
I have a closet-full of 35mm and medium format cameras from the 1960s to the pre-autofocus 1980s. To be sure, there are things I like about film. I love slides, and I would still like to get a medium format projector. What digital offers me, so far, is a great way to get prints from slides.
Aside from the issue of investing in an entirely new (digital) system, I am restrained from conversion to digital capture by the fact that I am left-eye-dominant and wear glasses. From the advent of autofocus technology on, they have clustered controls on the right back of all the cameras, right where my right eye and eyeglass lens are, making access to needed controls difficult. Then, of course, there is the joy of using the waist-level finder on a tripod-mounted, classic Twin Lens Reflex!
- Murray
I have been really impressed with your photography, and I thank you for the images you have shared with us.
I have a closet-full of 35mm and medium format cameras from the 1960s to the pre-autofocus 1980s. To be sure, there are things I like about film. I love slides, and I would still like to get a medium format projector. What digital offers me, so far, is a great way to get prints from slides.
Aside from the issue of investing in an entirely new (digital) system, I am restrained from conversion to digital capture by the fact that I am left-eye-dominant and wear glasses. From the advent of autofocus technology on, they have clustered controls on the right back of all the cameras, right where my right eye and eyeglass lens are, making access to needed controls difficult. Then, of course, there is the joy of using the waist-level finder on a tripod-mounted, classic Twin Lens Reflex!
- Murray
I think there should be a difference between photography and CGI. Thats what I hate.
Sure, you can push and pull on your processing and mess around with different exposures, but with digital one has ultimate freedom (in a preverse sense) to modify and render the image into something completely different than the original. My concern is not for effiency or evolution, rather that an image loses it "soul" when you download it into photosoap and with three clicks make it "better", I think it loses something. I am not afraid of technology, nor am I nostalgic. I just dont think digital modification is photography.
Sure, you can push and pull on your processing and mess around with different exposures, but with digital one has ultimate freedom (in a preverse sense) to modify and render the image into something completely different than the original. My concern is not for effiency or evolution, rather that an image loses it "soul" when you download it into photosoap and with three clicks make it "better", I think it loses something. I am not afraid of technology, nor am I nostalgic. I just dont think digital modification is photography.
Nik In San Diego