Shop More Submit  Join Login
×



Details

Submitted on
January 14, 2009
Image Size
276 KB
Resolution
800×533
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
260
Favourites
2 (who?)
Comments
4

Camera Data

Make
Canon
Model
Canon EOS 40D
Shutter Speed
1/2 second
Aperture
F/5.6
Focal Length
17 mm
ISO Speed
100
Date Taken
Jan 12, 2009, 7:07:47 PM
×
Working Copy 6 by cjbroom Working Copy 6 by cjbroom
© 2009 Jason Broom. All Rights Reserved.

HDR + Tonemapped from 3 Images... plus layering, blending, masking in PS CS3.

Was playing around with one of the 3 original RAW files from the +/- 2EV and after messing around with those luminosity sliders I got this really weird color for the sky... a few quick masks and edits later this is the result... let me know what you think... it's a little weird for my tastes... but I kinda like it.

It's far off the path of my original goal with these images... which was to produce an HDR image that looked ultra-realistic... which is what I think that I was beginning to accomplish here.

I believe that HDR is a powerful form of imagery, however I am beginning to see it become misused more and more, as it becomes "cool" and more popular.

I believe that the purpose of HDR was to represent with a photograph, more approximately what we see with our own eyes, since they constantly adjust to perceive different amounts of light. It helps to produce an image that better matches what we remember of a particular scene.

Unfortunately I have started to see more and more bad HDR images here on dA and elsewhere on the web. They are way "overcooked" and almost morph the image into something that looks nothing like what the photographer was actually looking at.

While some may point to this image and call "foul" or "hypocrite", I have addressed the fact that this has been manipulated with LR2 and PS CS3 to produce a surreal look in the color of the sky. At least the foreground maintains it's realistic look... which was/is what I'm going for.

But then, I suppose this discussion leads to the inevitable question or debate of what constitutes art. And who am I to define "rules" of art.

I probably should have written this in a journal... maybe I'll do that now...
Add a Comment:
 
:icongeolio:
geolio Featured By Owner Apr 26, 2009
Very well said. I believe HDR to be a powerful tool. And like tools before (Light meters, Dark room , and Photoshop) they are only tools. It still takes a good eye, patience, and technical knowledge to capture an idea to what the photographer wants. I think your image could have been captured just by using raw and not even need HDR. did you use raw for this?
Reply
:iconcjbroom:
cjbroom Featured By Owner Apr 26, 2009
yes, i did use raw... however I blended 3 exposures to produce the final result
Reply
:iconironiada:
Ironiada Featured By Owner Feb 15, 2009  Hobbyist Photographer
To me, the sky in this looks much better than tha other one.

I quote "I believe that the purpose of HDR was to represent with a photograph, more approximately what we see with our own eyes" ... you are quiet right but it often happens that the colors are way too plastic and give the photo a manipulation feel. I still get those colors and in some cases I keep them... I find B&W HDR the best way to keep most realism and detail in a photo...
Reply
:iconcjbroom:
cjbroom Featured By Owner Feb 19, 2009
yeah I like #5 better... I was just screwing around with sliders in Lightroom and I was like "OOOHHHHH COOOOL" when I saw it so I figured I'd post it up :D
Reply
Add a Comment: