@valdore - As you said, HDR made it so you can shoot directly into the sun. Why not just shoot with the sun to your back? You proved even further than HDR is the crutch of a terrible photographer.
A good photographer should be able to move the sun!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography - post your HDR
- Thread starter valdore
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A good photographer should be able to move the sun!
dude!! u rock.. this is an awesome piece of work! at par with some of the work in this forum.. let us know more details abt this pic...sidhart80 i really like your photo, if I was in a position to criticize i would but I am a true rookie as well, to hdr and to phtography, so I am no position to even try. here is mine though feel free to C&C..
Pure, unadulterated BS. This has to be the least informed statement I've seen recently. The equipment does not make the image. It is the photographer, not the camera. Some of my favorite images were made with what many would consider toy cameras. A good photographer can take a great picture with a homemade pinhole camera. A lazy, poor photographer can't make a good image with a $7000 Horseman. Sure, I prefer to use my nice Canon 20D because it makes it easier to do post production and gives me more control, but I can make do with a $5 single use camera if I have to and still make good pictures.
yes sorry i should have added that, i always forget
HDR on tripod
shut. 30sec...aperture: f/7.1...foc.length 18mm...ISO100
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. I know it doesn't come through well on the 'net, but give him the benefit of the doubt.
You're new; I get it. One thing about this forum is that we're generally civil. (The skirmish/trolling seen in this thread w/ General is an unfortunate exception).
@valdore - As you said, HDR made it so you can shoot directly into the sun. Why not just shoot with the sun to your back? You proved even further than HDR is the crutch of a terrible photographer.
First of all, get a brick, second, drop it on your nuts. Done? Great now maybe the crushing pain will allow you to focus.
We don't care about your ability. It's not to say that you suck (however, me/= to it, says you suck), but you have no position to criticize anything when you state that your first HDR was a year ago when you were a "terrible photographer" (so baseline says suckage). One year does not make you a great photographer; it doesn't matter what camera you use, what books you read, how you process your film or whore the pixels through photoshop. If you sucked a year ago, by now you've learned what landscape and portrait is now.
So, now that the pain is dulling slightly from the brick, let's analyze your quote.
If HDR is a crutch for a terrible photographer, and your proof is that he used HDR to get a properly exposed image in direct sunlight ( and a damn3d good one) then you obviously haven't actually ventured from your couch outside to witness the world. In fact, I can prove this to you. Pick up your camera. Point it at something. Say you are pointing it at a brick (the one that was used to make you focus is fine) and a desklamp in front of you. In this painstakingly developed metaphor, the brick is the structure in the image, and the desklamp, naturally, the sun. So as you instructed, "shoot with your back to the sun", so do it, spin 180 degrees around. Go ahead, do it. Done? Fantasmic! You'll now notice that you do infact have your back to the metaphorical "sun". However, THE SUBJECT ISN'T THERE? How is this? What? It isn't possible to move the sun and/or static buildings?
Lesson over.
Stick to your film. On that note, btw, your prints are done at walmart.
Sorry. Hard to tell. I've seen too many cases where people say that and mean it.
Was that IR HDR or highly edited HDR? If it was IR, that settles it. I'm getting a filter.
Straight HDR just colorized. I just liked the way the yellow brought out the cloud reflection in the building.
I am going to modify an old D70 for IR though.
whats everyone's HDR method? I dont know if this was discussed a whole lot, but is everyone taking multiple jpeg's or raw's? I'd also like to hear from some of the posters who take some of those magnificent pictures and get their thoughts on it, and read what their process is...(photoshop, photomatix, etc.)
Finally, I am very much new at this type of thing, but once I get my dynamic range of pictures, can someone give me a step by step tutorial in making some HDR pics? Thanks a bunch!!
Finally, I am very much new at this type of thing, but once I get my dynamic range of pictures, can someone give me a step by step tutorial in making some HDR pics? Thanks a bunch!!
Maybe you'd like to come round and wash my car...
Try the instructions on the first page of this thread, or just google 'HDR'... Lots of tutorials out there...
haha...i've been reading this thread for like a week or so, and i didnt even think to look there. thanks!
I've been trying some HDR lately buty i just don't have that many great shots yet, i really like the HDR cars i ve seen posted here, I'll be giving that a try, spring and weird lighting is coming to Canada finally so we'll see if that helps too
Two questions...
1: Is there a way for me to set my Nikon D50 to take these pictures in sequence? I've read on here and have seen people say that they can set their cameras to take -2 0 +2 in sequence without having to stop and change the settings manually.
2: Has anyone tried this with flowers? My step-mom grows tons of flowers and they are starting to flower, so im tryin to work with what i have hahaha...
Thanks!
1: Is there a way for me to set my Nikon D50 to take these pictures in sequence? I've read on here and have seen people say that they can set their cameras to take -2 0 +2 in sequence without having to stop and change the settings manually.
2: Has anyone tried this with flowers? My step-mom grows tons of flowers and they are starting to flower, so im tryin to work with what i have hahaha...
Thanks!
I am not familiar with Nikons, but i think so yeah, should be somewhere in your menu, it will most likely be abbreviated as AWB tahts what you are looking for..and then just set the different exposures you want..when you take a pic all you gotta do is click on the shutter three times.
Ok so i got Photomatix and tried a little sample image of my living room, i had to manually change the exposure so my camera moved a little ( you can see in the picture frame and the tissue box) and my sister decided to move also, but this was my first try so let me know what you think!
i used -2 0 +2
i used -2 0 +2
Linlithgow Palace
Went to Linlithgow Palace last Thursday to take some pictures, but the light was really disappointing. All the pics looked pretty poor, but i wanted to try and do something with this one, so i tried the hdr treatment - not that i really knew what i was doing.
Dont think it looks too bad. You guys are welcome to tell me differently.
Went to Linlithgow Palace last Thursday to take some pictures, but the light was really disappointing. All the pics looked pretty poor, but i wanted to try and do something with this one, so i tried the hdr treatment - not that i really knew what i was doing.
Dont think it looks too bad. You guys are welcome to tell me differently.
Sorry to be a critic, but it's the side of a building. Where's the point of interest?
it seems that's all you ever are...
anyway, I think it's an okay picture, just a little too much grass and it's not very striking.
and as a small correction termina3 it's the side of a cool building.
Point of interest? How often have you seen a Palace with Photomatix plastered over the side of it?
Ok, Point taken, maybe, technically, its a poor picture.
tuffluffjimmy, thanks for that. And yeah, it is a pretty cool building. Certainly, Oliver Cromwell thought so when he resided here in 1650, or Bonnie Prince Charlie in 1745.