Focusing on Digital Photography
11 Aug
An interesting question recently came up in a forum regarding one of my HDR composite Buttermere landscape images,
Why choose HDR?
High Dynamic Range (HDR) imaging techniques aren’t new. They’ve actually been around since the 1930s, but have only really become accessible in mainstream digital photography relatively recently with the release of HDR software aimed at the amateur and professional market.
When I took the shots of the scenes, I wasn’t solely intending on shooting for HDR processing, but seeing just how contrasty the scenes were I decided it would be a good idea to bracket my exposures to capture the details in the shadows and highlights that would otherwise be lost in a single exposure metered for the mid-tones.
Taking HDR out of the picture (no pun intended) completely, bracketing exposures is an established technique which can help a photographer get the best exposure for the scene. With the ability to review shots immediately after they’re taken, it’s probably not used as much with digital SLRs as it was with slide film where the exposure latitude was very slim.
Bracketing my exposure gave me some additional reassurance that I was capturing the maximum amount of detail from the scene and also allowed me to have the option of producing a HDR variation.
If you like, HDR, was an afterthought. Okay, it wasn’t, but it could well have been.
So, the HDR composites haven’t replaced the single exposure versions. I just wanted to have them in addition to them and also try my hand at HDR for the first time. Sure, I could turn a blind eye to HDR and go on about how it’s not proper photography, but I’d like to think I’m a bit more open-minded than that. You don’t know what you’re missing until you’ve tried it. Right?
I wonder if because HDR is fairly new to the world of popular digital photography people are more likely to question its use as opposed to questioning decisions made about other, more established types of processing? After all, you don’t see many people questioning the use of a digital camera nowadays do you?
It would be interesting to see whether or not, in the future, a more typical response to a photo will be
Why didn’t you use HDR?
Although, by then, our cameras may be able to capture the entire dynamic range of a contrasty scene and images that contain as much shadow and highlight detail as our eyes can detect become commonplace.
I’m looking forward to that day!
Here are a few links to HDR software, if you’d like to have a go for yourself.
2 Responses for "Why Didn’t You Use HDR?"
I have to admit I’m not a big fan of HDR. Mainly because most HDR makes the photo look unreal. I realise this is often just an abuse of HDR, but it’s put me off the idea. Of course slight HDR to simply improve a shot is fine, and if it’s not noticeable then that’s great. But if I can look at a photo and spot it a mile off then it’s probably because the photo looks more like an oil painting!
Those hugely exaggerated HDR composites aren’t exactly my cup of tea either and yet there are Flickr groups dedicated to the wild and whackier ones so someone must like them!
When I see a photo with a large dynamic range, I automatically think it’s a HDR comp, even when it’s very subtle. It’s not necessarily because it’s a HDR comp, but because I’m used to seeing photos with less dynamic range.
This seems a bit perverse because we’re used to seeing a greater dynamic range with our eyes and yet when a HDR photo demonstrates a greater dynamic range than a single exposure we deem it unnatural looking!
Surely, traditional single exposure photographs with their cut-down dynamic range are more unnatural?
Leave a reply