Wild Side HDR - first HDR attempt

[shutternut]

Ok, this is my first HDR attempt. I didn't want to overkill it, so it's probably not as heavily processed as you might expect. I'm looking to see what I did wrong, how I could make it better, and any other general critique it needs. Is it too bright? Should I have had more shadow detail in it? If you think there's a step I missed or a general rule of thumb I should consider, please detail it out for me. Thank you!

Here's the original I worked from. Yes I know it's a jpeg, and yes I know that's breaking all sorts of rules, but I wanted to try it out and see what happened because I thought it was an interesting picture.

Original:


Camera: Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi
Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/1250)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Exposure Bias: 0 EV



"Final" HDR:

[Japaslavian]

I just don't really think there is a significant enough difference between the two to say anything.
The leaves in the foreground of the hdr-ish one have a little extra detail, but overall I think the original is just as good if not better.

[digirebelva]

Agreed other than the HDR image being a bit lighter all around there really isnt much difference between the 2 images. Remember not all images will benefit from HDR treatment..especially (from my experience) those with a lot of bright sunlight and very little shadow (dark) areas

[shutternut]

Originally Posted by Japaslavian

I just don't really think there is a significant enough difference between the two to say anything.
The leaves in the foreground of the hdr-ish one have a little extra detail, but overall I think the original is just as good if not better.

That was kind of my feeling on it too which is why I posted it for critique..anything I can try to do differently to salvage it, or is this an image that's better left alone as is?

[shutternut]

Originally Posted by digirebelva

Agreed other than the HDR image being a bit lighter all around there really isnt much difference between the 2 images. Remember not all images will benefit from HDR treatment..especially (from my experience) those with a lot of bright sunlight and very little shadow (dark) areas

Thanks for the feedback.. I felt sorta of the same so I wasn't sure if there was anything I could try differently. If those with bright and little shadow don't benefit, in your opinion, you think those with great shadow and less light are the best for treatment? How do you choose which images are good for HDR and which aren't?

I chose this one just because of the leaves detail in it, but it didn't quite come out the way I expected...although that probably just reflects my novice with this type of processing at the moment..

[PrimetimePhotography]

if you dont mind m asking, what does HDR stand for?

[bradzo66]

Originally Posted by PrimetimePhotography

if you dont mind m asking, what does HDR stand for?

High Dynamic Range Image , its a process where the camera is set to take three (or five ) images at different exposures(bracketed exposures) and then blended together using a HDR program , you can get a similiar effect by tonemapping a single image .


As for this image I would have to agree , there isnt a great change but this stuff brings out more opinions than any other sort of photography , some love it others hate it , I'm just emerging from the begginners stage and am enjoying the effects , I find I get the best results with landscapes and images containing old buildings , but thats my taste , I would say keep trying different subjects and stick with what pleases your eye , all the best .

[Trader]

I see you posted one before and one after shot. A typical High Dynamic Range photo is created from 3 or more images (does not matter if they are .jpg) the idea is that in the final version the image has a wider range of detail, i.e. the detail that is in the shadows is as clear as the detail that is in the brighter parts of the image. Did you use a software application to generate the after image?

[shutternut]

Originally Posted by Trader

I see you posted one before and one after shot. A typical High Dynamic Range photo is created from 3 or more images (does not matter if they are .jpg) the idea is that in the final version the image has a wider range of detail, i.e. the detail that is in the shadows is as clear as the detail that is in the brighter parts of the image. Did you use a software application to generate the after image?

Good question and I apologize for not clarifying before hand. I used camera raw on the jpg to create 5 bracketed shots at different exposures, with the image shown being the base "0" exposure. I used Photomatix to generate an HD image and then tone map. I opened the HD image with the rest of the images in photoshop and used masking to pick and choose what I did and didn't want from each and blend them.

I didn't want an "overcooked" look for this one, but I think I probably erred a little on the side of too little for it, but then again, I still am a bit clueless on how I'm doing it all.

[Art]

Shutternut, I am learning HDR too, I have posted in 2 times and redo a lot of times in my laptop, bottom line is really a matter of your taste, but in this particular one you were so soft with the HDR, I would like to see a more agressive HDR.
BTW what about EXIF or measurements of your shots? how many of them? did you follow EV values? and its equivalences? too much questions? relax...it is just to carburate in the HDR wrold, jajajaja
Thanks Art