Subscribe in a reader

« 
 »
Dec 18 2009

The HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss?

Posted by Jeff in HDR

Building Museum HDR

Before I get started, let me just say that I am not looking to stir the flames that seemed to have been fanned by Trey Ratcliff’s guest blog appearance over at the Photoshop Insider this past Wednesday.  Trey wasn’t the one stirring things up, in fact his article really had nothing to do with HDR and was a very insightful piece that I highly recommend you read.  Here’s the thing though, Trey is most widely known for his HDR photography (he has just released a book of his HDR work) and in some circles is widely credited with popularizing the look with his heavily toned, brightly saturated images.  Of course Trey would be the first to downplay that analogy.  He’s just a guy that found something that he really enjoyed doing and was passionate about and shared it through his website, Stuck In Customs.  So why then is there such venom for over something that so many people have come to enjoy?

Seattle-4 HDR

There are those that might call themselves purists and will decry even the mentioning of HDR as incorrect and a bastardization of the true meaning of high dynamic range.  Are they correct?  Well, technically yes.  HDR is more about capturing the range of tones that fall outside of the normal dynamic range of a single image range.  It is a process to capture that extended tonal range through the use of multiple exposures, which are then combined into a 32-bit file that contains extended highlight and shadow detail.  When that information is squeezed back into an 8 or 16-bit file, those extended tones need to be mapped back into a gamut that can be seen and printed by today’s display technology, thus we get the term “tonemapping”.  Sounds complicated doesn’t it?  The simple truth is that the look that many adapters of HDR capture and processing can look over-the-top to some people.  I have heard it referred to as cartoonish or Harry Potterish.  Or, as someone said last Wednesday, “It Sux” and “isn’t real photography”.  It’s this type of statement that I have a problem with.

Juan Gris Portrait of Picasso

Juan Gris - Portrait of Picasso

The mere words imply that we must all conform to one person’s definition of what is good and what is bad.  What is art and what is trash.  So if this is the case, who’s opinion is the correct one?  Was it the person that said that Cubism isn’t art?  How about Surrealism, or pop-art, or any other art form that was new and innovative and “different” from the norm.  The truth is that, as much as it irritates some of you out there, the term HDR will forever be associated with a style of imaging, no matter what the process or software used.  There’s no since in fighting it because it is just too popular of a label now to ever get that genie back in the bottle.  As for whether or not HDR is art or not is not for me to say, at least not where you are concerned.  You will need to form your own opinion.  If you like it, great, if not, that’s okay too.  Just remember that any art form is subjective and open to self-interpretation.  Just as I don’t think that Campbell Soup cans are art, there are a lot of folks that would disagree.

Bone Yard 19 HDR

As for those of you that are interested in learning HDR and exploring what it has to offer, I say play to your heart’s content.  Photography should be personal before it is anything else.  If you like what you see and want to try your hand at it, then by all means, you should.  How many people do you think have ever tried to emulate the style and processes of Ansel Adams because they so loved the look of his images.  They may not have been successful but I bet they learned a lot along the way, which probably made them better photographers.   Just remember that you should always try to create for yourself.  Do the thing that inspires you the most and then work at it, rejoice in it, and, if you are brave enough to face the haters, share it with the rest of the world.

Related posts:

  1. HDR – The Debate Rolls On
  2. To HDR or not to HDR, that is the question
  3. When HDR Goes Bad
  4. HDR Processing in Photoshop – A Follow-Up Video

This entry was posted on Friday, December 18th, 2009 at 12:06 am and is filed under HDR. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

29 Responses to “The HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss?”
Trackbacks
  1. Bengt B says:
    December 18, 2009 at 4:35 am

    HDR ..what's the fuzz http://www.revellphotography.com/blog/?p=4355

    Reply
  2. Photography says:
    December 18, 2009 at 6:06 am

    The HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss? – http://bit.ly/50Zjxe #photography #hdr

    Reply
  3. Antony Barroux says:
    December 18, 2009 at 6:32 am

    The HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss? – http://bit.ly/50Zjxe #photography #hdr (via @phototownship)

    Reply
  4. zadoune says:
    December 18, 2009 at 6:38 am

    J'aime le HDR perso :) – RT @pixfan – The HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss? – http://bit.ly/50Zjxe #photography #hdr (via @phototownship)

    Reply
  5. Andrew Turtsevych says:
    December 18, 2009 at 6:45 am

    Страсти вокруг HDR (на англ.) The HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss? – http://bit.ly/8qGFc8 (via @phototownship RT @pixfan) #photography #hdr

    Reply
  6. Louis Vitsas says:
    December 19, 2009 at 9:18 am

    The HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss? http://tinyurl.com/yjop57y

    Reply
  7. vipgrafx says:
    December 20, 2009 at 5:48 am

    The HDR Debate: Whats All The Fuss? – http://shar.es/aDFyE

    Reply
  8. Silvia Ganora says:
    December 20, 2009 at 8:25 am

    PhotoWalkPro » The #HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss? http://ow.ly/NW6f

    Reply
  9. Al Ward says:
    December 20, 2009 at 8:35 am

    RT @photosil: PhotoWalkPro » The #HDR Debate – What’s All The Fuss? http://ow.ly/NW6f A non-issue… I LOVE HDR, so there. ;)

    Reply
  10. Larry Arrington says:
    December 21, 2009 at 9:08 am

    The HDR debate – What in the world is all of the fuss about? http://bit.ly/6XfHRD

    Reply
  11.  
Comments
  1. Warren says:
    December 18, 2009 at 7:01 am

    Right on! Some people just need to take a pill sometimes. Photography is an art no matter whether you capture your images “normally” or use software to enhance or otherwise modify the result. I sometimes think that what would be considered pure HDR is artificial looking. By the same token, I think some photos using HDR techniques pushed to the limits and beyond are fabulous art.

    Since the beginning of photography, people have been experimenting and developing different techniques to produce their art. Not every technique will please every person. That doesn’t mean you have to be vindictive about techniques that you don’t consider “pure”. Get a grip. Let people practice their art in their way and you practice your art in yours.

    Reply
  2. Michael Palmer says:
    December 18, 2009 at 8:27 am

    I really think that’s the Fuss, people just like to be on sides, Nikon vs Canon, Mac vs PC, its in our nature to debate, I think Trey has so many haters because we all wish we could travel like he does. = )

    Hope your holiday is fantastic Jeff —-

    Reply
  3. Peter Gamba says:
    December 18, 2009 at 8:32 am

    HDR is just another tool as far as I can see. Use it, don’t use it. Did the image start as a photograph shot by the photographer? Then what the photographer chooses to do after that is what they want. If someone likes the HDR look and wants to learn, then why not. Gee, we all want to be better photographers, that is the bottom line right?

    Reply
  4. mike meyer says:
    December 18, 2009 at 8:47 am

    I have to agree with everyone. I think most people don’t like the oversaturated look or the stormy clouds that probably didn’t really look that stormy. You’d think that tornadoes were forming all over the place with some of these images, probably from global warming. Like Mr. Palmer said people are just jealous and that’s why they are haters. Can’t we all just get along?! I wouldn’t worry too much about this debate, like Jeff said HDR is here to stay. Now what will be interesting is how photos will look when we have cameras, monitors and printers that can capture true 32 bit images or more. Remember Bill Gates once said “why would you ever need more than 640k of Ram.

    mike meyer

    Reply
  5. Andy says:
    December 18, 2009 at 9:08 am

    I think part of this issue is due to oversaturation… not of the image, but of its use!

    Like any new technique or new technology, there will be a bandwagon effect. Right now there is probably an overkill of use of the technique, with everyone wanting to try it. (Which is perfectly fine.) Obviously, some will use it more effectively than others.

    My guess is, like any other new technique or art form, it’s use in terms of quantity will moderate over time, and folks will be more selective in when to use it, rather than using it when perhaps another technique might be a better choice. At that point, the controversy will subside.

    Reply
  6. techpriester says:
    December 18, 2009 at 9:27 am

    Didn’t we have the same debate over artificial lighting, color film, digital cameras and photoshop?
    There will always be a new technique around and some people will always reject it for no rational reason.
    Just don’t listen to them and do, what you like to do …

    Reply
  7. Peter James Zielinski says:
    December 18, 2009 at 9:39 am

    None of this matters.

    There are always going to be people who disagree. And if you like it? Great. Go do it.

    I used to spend my time trying to respond to each troll and every comment….really trying to defend it.

    Then I was paid a few thousand dollars to shoot every Broadway theatre using “an HDR technique” because the client loved the look.

    At the end of the day…it ain’t the purists or the trolls who hire me.

    Reply
  8. Rich C says:
    December 18, 2009 at 9:44 am

    Great follow up on the reaction to Trey’s post over at Kelby’s site! I was surprised to read some of the venom in response to Trey’s post / work. For my part, the first time I saw his work I was extremely inspired, and I started playing with HDR in the extreme (halos, cartoonish look, etc). Since first playing with it I’ve mellowed and looked for ways to present scenes in a very realistic way. HDR is one tool I use, but I’ve got a big bag of tricks now.

    Still, Trey’s site constantly inspires me. With or without HDR, he’s got a great knack for finding amazing scenes and telling the tale. Whatever he uses, I think the fact he inspires so many folks is good enough on its own!

    Reply
  9. Barry Cunningham says:
    December 18, 2009 at 9:59 am

    When I see overly processed HDR and have to let someone know what I think about it, I simply say that it is a genre that bores me — much like the soft focus pictorialist images of the Photo-Secession bore many people today. The conversation about “What is Art?” reeks of Platonist drivel. However, I am an expert on what I like and I can tell you why I like or do not like something. I don’t expect everybody to like the same things I do. Life would be rather boring if that were the case. I don’t even expect that I will like exactly the same things a week from now or a year from now. I’m a man. I can change, if I have to.

    Reply
  10. Marianne Bush says:
    December 18, 2009 at 10:17 am

    Great post, Jeff.

    Reply
  11. Nate Lawson says:
    December 18, 2009 at 11:27 am

    Very well said indeed!!

    Personally, I love HDR and the many different ways you can process it. If I have a problem with an image it’s not because it’s a HDR image, but because the image itself isn’t that good. Sometimes people try to “fix” an otherwise bland photo, maybe with bad composition, by using HDR. This doesn’t work.

    As as far as HDR being fake, you could say that about most photography now. How many times do take a photo and not touch it at all during post processing? My guess is never. So in a way, we are changing the reality of what we actually saw through the viewfinder to enhance the photo, make it sharper, more colorful, make it look like it came from a film camera, etc.

    Photography is an art form, and therefore, will always be up for criticism and praise.

    Reply
  12. Laurie says:
    December 18, 2009 at 1:39 pm

    Using multiple exposures, plus Photomatix Pro, I can get enhanced “natural-looking” images that look better than a single image (Photoshoped or not). Heck, I have an iPhone app that makes pseudo-HDR images (from two exposures) that improve iPhone photos immensely. The iPhone app is called TrueHDR, no kidding.

    Reply
  13. Dave Wilson says:
    December 18, 2009 at 3:53 pm

    Hear, hear! I do HDR because I enjoy the kinds of images I can produce using various tonemappings and because it allows me to create realistic images that would otherwise be impossible to create using a single exposure (yes – lots of pictures people see use HDR without it being obvious). Whether anyone else likes them is entirely secondary to me.

    Art is a personal thing and HDR is merely another tool in my digital gadget bag that helps me create a form of art that please me.

    Reply
  14. William Beem says:
    December 18, 2009 at 4:09 pm

    Crappy photography is crappy photography, so the fact that a final image requires one or several clicks to create it is irrelevant. You can over-process anything. To some extent, I like a bolder image than reality. Other people will criticize my images and taste because it doesn’t match theirs. That’s fine. I’m still doing what I like.

    I’ve often been critical of HDR because MOST of the images I’ve seen really sucked, in my opinion. That said, I’m a big fan of Trey’s work. I recently signed up for the workshop that he & Scott Bourne are conducting in Tampa next month, and I’m watching Matt Kloskowski’s HDR course on KelbyTraining.com. I figure it’s worth a try. I’m very pleased with Matt’s approach of creating images that represents what he saw, rather than the cartoonish HDR images that I don’t particularly like.

    Why do I like Trey & Matt’s work vs. some of the other HDR images I’ve seen? I think it’s because they’re showing images with good composition and interesting subject matter. They start with a good image and process it to their own taste.

    It’s not just HDR that creates some funky images. Topaz Adjust is something that’s really been abused by people who are a overly generous with the slider. I remember seeing a portrait of a little girl that I thought was absolutely tragic after it was processed in Topaz. Still, it’s the creator’s right to be tragic.

    Reply
  15. Greg Kushmerek says:
    December 19, 2009 at 8:28 am

    I really like the way you put this. People should be free to pursue their creative ideas and bask in the learning process. Others will find inspiration. Maybe the results won’t be in the Louvre, but there’s merit to the process.

    Thanks for saying this.

    Reply
  16. E.R.Smith says:
    December 19, 2009 at 4:05 pm

    Photography has always been technologically driven . Just wait until this feature is built into your moms point and shoot. The technique solves too many inherent problems with digital photography. Most notably exposure and contrast. I just bought a film scanner that brags on multiple passes to increase detail. HDR is obviously built in. Having said that I’m a big fan of HDR and I love the more extreme examples of the craft.

    Reply
  17. Jim Austin says:
    December 23, 2009 at 10:29 pm

    Symphony in A Moment: HDR Photography from Eight Maestros

    http://www.apogeephoto.com/sept2009/jaustin92009.html

    HDR For the Love of Light, Vision From Nine Photographers

    http://www.apogeephoto.com/feb2007/jaustin22007_1.shtmlz

    What HDR Really Stands For

    http://www.apogeephoto.com/march2008/jaustin32008.shtml

    Reply
  18.  
Leave a Reply