U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: R.I.P. HDR

Re: R.I.P. HDR

  • To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
  • Subject: Re: R.I.P. HDR
  • From: eric nelson <emanphoto@gmail.com>
  • Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:20:36 -0500
  • Comments: alt-photo-process mailing list
  • Delivered-to: alt-photo-process-l-archive@www.usask.ca
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com;s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;bh=lkBIh7VoIS5GhvV9Ls7wZ747+xMzU1ZJxPSDKsM3KrA=;b=gIFrfNLyne/VqkXZcBffBCvYTVQBqfXHykfZ5Nkgyvg3Qd1yb3E+s4jUUccXbXZh1zWddIl3ddSTA7Ao+MTUjohAAts9xfpseQTxKWkoFQfKCXOkKXV/UwIkRZOlSKfA/4hyrqqGJ8UcK3wMG25p6THemkGQQWm8KVsVnGhvLtk=
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;b=IU3qj4lO0jvE1eSuWQlWzAmg7RcNvOssLkVnw/v4X8SaguKNqq5BCffTTeUzK6VV9vVgbj5fg9qr6hVrhOAHPXsGwgs+s4Q14JXTWDpSJQjhqmkRvPCHIkxsX8dgGNb5hgyyKNun41BUb9lWL1qwOYEXC7CFLywbNz8wdgo7eZs=
  • List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  • References: <9527a22e0909172348q21390b12u1afcc35dc172b564@mail.gmail.com><!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAIsdeRRYKtgRkfoAENz0NV7CgAAAEAAAAJCzj8GBRV9HvKlZQX7kKzQBAAAAAA==@caribsurf.com>
  • Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

True enough.   In a melding of the 2, I can scan a piece of film and pull more from it than I can in the darkroom.  Maybe I'm a poopy printer, but there's no easy way I know of that would allow me to duplicate those results.
So I don't have much issue w/digital, my issue w/the majority of HDR images that I have seen is that that they look so bloody fake and affected.  It's a look, and if it's someone's look who is reading this, don't take offense.  This was the first article I'd seen that finally addressed this out-of-control-sophmoric-use of the effect.  One could counter with 'all photographs lie' so then we'd be differentiating between a small fib and a whopper.

Skill in HDR, heck PS in general, comes from using it with subtlety and my issue (which was addressed nicely in the article) is that it's use has been anything but.

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 7:20 AM, BOB KISS <bobkiss@caribsurf.com> wrote:


            I read it and agree.  I was “dissed” in the past for posting a statement that all HDR really did was compensate for the limited dynamic range of the digital image capture process.  It was a corrective solution to a problem that doesn’t exist for the b&w photographer who has made a few tests and has a basic knowledge of the zone system.  Further, color neg has a dynamic range nearly as good as some b&w films and, though it is difficult to push/pull process without risking crossed curves, scanning the color neg can either:

1)    Capture the large density range created in a color neg shot of a high scene brightness scene or…

2)    Fix the crossed curves in a color neg that has been pushed or pulled. 

Sooooooooooooo, as I said, HDR image processing is a crutch for digital capture’s limited dynamic

range.  Of course, as western art is all about “impact”, the article makes a good point that everyone jumped on the “saturation” band wagon and created scenes either reminiscent of Agfa Velvia or perceptions resulting from the 70s use of psychedelic drugs. 

            What ever happened to subtlety?  I tremble to even mention shibui.  ;-))




From: eric nelson [mailto:emanphoto@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 2:49 AM
To: Alt Photo
Subject: R.I.P. HDR


Finally someone has put onto a page what I've been thinking all along!



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4436 (20090918) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.


  • Follow-Ups: