HDR comparsion - need your opinion

[agunther]

I am doing some evaluations and I would greatly appreciate your comments. Please do not read other commentors posts before making up your own minds (I want to avoid the herd mentality and get unbiased views).

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f29/andre75/hdr-comparison.jpg

[mushy]

:scratch I won't say which I voted for so as not to bias anyone else, but I think you should have added a bit more as to what we are voting for. Is it the most natural looking shot or the one that stands out the most or perhaps the most surreal looking one. Either way its a cool perspective and a great photo

[Zeus1]

I don't understand the meaning of this comparison....
Each HDR technique, be it in Photomatix, Hydra, Bracketeer, etc, is just one of the steps in postprocessing. After HDR tonemapping a session in Photoshop or Lightzone is advisable.
So if you want us to choose the best HDR program...much depends on the final result after postprocessing in PS or LZ.

[agunther]

While I agree with both of you, to me the proof is in the pudding. Often I am having a hard time deciding which one I like best. That is often the case when I try out different methods.
BTW: I have applied basic post processing steps to each of the images, but I have applied the same amount to each.
So while you may not agree with my method, I think it should be fairly easy for everyone to pick a favorite!
I think its obvious to tell the last one is the most surreal and the first one the most color neutral. Please use your intuition and forget about technical things. I made the mistake to show which programs I used, so I can understand the confusion.

[pathfinder]

Andre, you have a lovely website with lots of nice images - http://www.aguntherphotography.com/

I did not vote on this poll, because I am of a mixed opinion myself.

Generally I prefer images that look "normal" without the radical haloes of the far out HDR look. Generally, but then again, not always for every image. And my opinion may change from day to day.

I have the same dilemma myself as I edit images - how neutral shall I keep them, or how far can I push the processing to look more like I saw the image in my minds eye when I tripped the shutter.

If I had to choose, probably #3

[agunther]

Andre, you have a lovely website with lots of nice images - http://www.aguntherphotography.com/

I did not vote on this poll, because I am of a mixed opinion myself.

Generally I prefer images that look "normal" without the radical haloes of the far out HDR look. Generally, but then again, not always for every image. And my opinion may change from day to day.

I have the same dilemma myself as I edit images - how neutral shall I keep them, or how far can I push the processing to look more like I saw the image in my minds eye when I tripped the shutter.

If I had to choose, probably #3

Thanks Pathfinder. Coming from a pro like yourself this really means a lot to me.

I noticed the halos too, but I didn't really want to state my opinion until the poll results are in (tomorrow). I think I could edit them away easily.

I also noticed the tendency of HDR images to look extremely processed, but I am not convinced either way. I am not a big fan of the airbrushed look myself, but I want to see what the overall perception is.

Thanks for your comment! Maybe I can convince you to vote after all.

Just think about which one you would rather hang on your wall. As long as you make the decision with your gut and not your photographers mind it will be exactly what I am looking for.

Thannks

Andre

[jhelms]

I voted on just my opinion of which effect I liked the most, but it would need a little curves adjustments after the making of the HDR, but cool shots either way! :thumb

[jwallacephoto]

If no single image suits you, try masking parts of them together by hand. Such as:

- the near ground (snow? sand?) from HDR PhotoStudio
- the inside of the rock formation from Tone Compressor
- the distant ground from Details Enhancer
- and the sky from DE extreme settings (remove the halos in the process)

[rwells]

I seem to always be in my own little world about this kind of thing, but here goes. To me, it all depends on what your goal is. I personally think that trumps the "it always has to look natural" line of thinking. Photogs almost 100% of the time manipulate an image in post, and that's not "natural".

But, I do acknoledge everyone's right to like what they like. :thumb

--------------------------------------------------------------------

If you were wanting a photo that was close to what you captured with your eyes, then I'd say the first one.

I'd say the third pic is what you hoped it would look like out of the camera.

If your wanting a pic that's more art, the last one is a clear winner. (And my choice)

YMMV


I am doing some evaluations and I would greatly appreciate your comments. Please do not read other commentors posts before making up your own minds (I want to avoid the herd mentality and get unbiased views).

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f29/andre75/hdr-comparison.jpg

[agunther]

Thanks for the discussion. I agree with you Randy, it all depends on the objective.
I think the "HDR look" is a bit overused and prefer if it isn't as much in your face, but I agree that the extreme processed images have a certain wow factor.
Here is another try I did this evening, immediately after downloading the HDR Photostudio successor, HDR Expose.
The tool has come quite far since my last tests. I could get this result very fast and I loved some of the new settings.
What do you think?
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f29/andre75/hdr-expose-1.jpg