Will's High Dynamic Range Photograph

[Snow Miser]

I must comment on Will's High Dynamic Range photograph in his December 3rd Comments. It is fantastic!! I made it my desktop background and I can't stop looking at it. It really makes me feel like I am there. Great job Will! Thanks for sharing it.

[CHRIS]

That is really cool. I would love to be there right now.

[KathyC]

Me Too......

[Charlie]

me three.....

[Snow Miser]

Will, not sure if you're on the forums or not, but would you mind filling us in on what kind a camera and software you used? I showed the photo to a couple of guys at work who know much more about photography than I do, and they were asking. Thanks!

[Bill O]

Will, not sure if you're on the forums or not, but would you mind filling us in on what kind a camera and software you used? I showed the photo to a couple of guys at work who know much more about photography than I do, and they were asking. Thanks!

I think others can fill in. The camera is not that important (digital obviously). From what I know you bracket the exposure making sure to get details in the highlights and shadows. From there you need Photoshop. I don't have a version that does HDR, but I think it's a fairly automated process.

There are some hot debates about HDR and you have to be careful about how it is used. There is no doubt that the human eye has a bigger range than any camera, but there are side effects to using HDR imaging.

[JimS]

There are some hot debates about HDR and you have to be careful about how it is used. There is no doubt that the human eye has a bigger range than any camera, but there are side effects to using HDR imaging.

I've admired Will's photography for some time, he really captures the spirit of the whites and his experience with them through his pictures. He has a great technical mastery of the camera and a darn good eye...so this comment is not to discount him at all...but...

I agree with Bill on this one...I'm not a fan of HDR technology as it stands now...

The idea is great, using software to expand the dynamic range of a picture to allow all the range of tones that the eye can see, but arbitrarily letting software dial up the contrasts doesn't often work at creating a scene closer to life...and often the pictures look cartoonish to me.

Some artifacts that are often seen are unnatural contrasts, halos around objects of contrast, greyed or midtone skies, and a lack of natural balance between objects that should be highlighed and those that should be shadowed.

That being said, it is a popular art form, and many people do like images like this. It'll likely grow in popularity too ... but I just seem to like my images a bit more real to the natural way light behaves...

...and again...not against Will, just the technology...

[Snow Miser]

Thanks for the info Bill and Jim. I agree with you that photography done the natural way looks best, and that HDR is a good way to sometimes put a different spin on the images. It's nice to look at photos done both ways.

[mtruman]

I'm not generally a HDR fan either, but I have to say that I think it works for this shot. Gives in kind of a surreal quality

[BlueDog]

FWIW.... EXIF Data

Exif Sub IFD

* Lens F-Number / F-Stop = 709/100 ===> ?/7.09
* ISO Speed Ratings = 100
* Original Date/Time = 2009:12:02 03:18:27
* Digitization Date/Time = 2009:12:02 03:18:27
* Focal Length = 20/1 mm ===> 20 mm
* Colour Space = sRGB (1)
* Image Width = 1024 pixels
* Image Height = 683 pixels

Exif IFD0

* Photometric Interpretation = RGB (2)
* Camera Model = Canon EOS REBEL T1i
* Picture Orientation = normal (1)
* X-Resolution = 72/1 ===> 72
* Y-Resolution = 72/1 ===> 72
* X/Y-Resolution Unit = inch (2)
* Last Modified Date/Time = 2009:12:02 03:18:27