duane

03 Apr 2006 1,287 views
 
supporter of
atom rss 1.0 rss 2.0
web browser google del.icio.us digg technorati
| lost password
birth date
cancel
photoblog image Take 2

Take 2

2nd attempt - which one do you prefer?

Here's my second attempt at an HDR of Canterbury Cathedral. For those who are new, check out yesterday's shot. I've tried removing the halos, but it's still there slightly.

Thanks everyone for the comments. It's great to be able to learn so much from you. Following your comments, I've tried to make this version more natural and less vivid. Also followed up on Bjorn's suggesting to make it more "vertical" to show the height.

So is yesterday's better? Or is this an improvement?

Take 2

2nd attempt - which one do you prefer?

Here's my second attempt at an HDR of Canterbury Cathedral. For those who are new, check out yesterday's shot. I've tried removing the halos, but it's still there slightly.

Thanks everyone for the comments. It's great to be able to learn so much from you. Following your comments, I've tried to make this version more natural and less vivid. Also followed up on Bjorn's suggesting to make it more "vertical" to show the height.

So is yesterday's better? Or is this an improvement?

comments (14)

I don't like the purple sky in this one. The colors are better in the previous shot, I think. Cheers.
  • skee
  • skeetown UK
  • 3 Apr 2006, 02:30
...but I love the composition ;-)

All this HDR talk is beginning to get on my nerves... peeps were talking fab pics of landscapes before "HDR".....hellooooooooo :-D

Because of yesterdays sky....more interesting, todays sky is a bit muddy. I will have to say yesteerday is better!

Keep on at it.... this "egg" will soon crack!
  • Veloran
  • Singapore
  • 3 Apr 2006, 07:32
The colours here look really strange... Yesterday's was better.
Not really a great fan of HDR, I like the green it looks natural but the trees, the building and the sky are a bit unreal. But then again I guess thats what HDR does
  • sk
  • Smallville
  • 3 Apr 2006, 10:52
yesterdays was better, if u use HDR, do it at small fractions of f stops, it looks less unreal. I am still learning how to use it myself but I really like it and I feel if used effectively it can be a great assest. The shot i put up today was HDR
  • Suby
  • MK, UK
  • 3 Apr 2006, 11:32
Okay Suby will jump in now.

Have tried to stay as far away from all the HDR images been put up. I for one am not a fan of HDR. Tried it out a few times and I have to say, I really have not been impressed.

What does HDR add to the image? Are we now saying that without HDR we cannot have a lovely landscape shot? We are already killing the photography art with all the post editing we do. Now another one has been added. HDR!!! Why do we need it?

I have to say, there "MAY" be situations when it might be wise to use HDR(emphasis on may), these 2 images for me are not one of those times.

Whats with the halo effect? Looks way too fake. Now what we have here is a painting wanting to look like a photograph. Is that a compliment? NO.

As the Skee has rightly pointed out (is this guy ever wrong peeps)," this "egg" will soon crack!"

Suby

P.s
I love the image by the way, just not feeling the HDR.
I like yesterday's better. I'd be interested in seeing the image prior to the HDR.
  • Paul
  • United States
  • 3 Apr 2006, 14:19
I think I prefer yesterday's shot, although both are nice.
  • Bjrn Utpott
  • Netherlands
  • 3 Apr 2006, 15:44
Hmmm, very interesting discussion that you started here. I'm not a fan of HDR images either. I don't mind shadow areas when they are balanced by, or focus your attention on, the brightly lit areas of a photograph. On top of that, it is good if not all areas of an image contain information. That said, you could probably improve this HDR image further. The halo effect is most pronounced around the trees on the left. If you remove the trees, you can replace them with sky. That way the halo is gone and the outline of the pinnacles would be more visible. I like the more vertical feel of the cathedral in this photo.
  • chunter
  • Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK
  • 3 Apr 2006, 15:56
Whoa, steady the buffs. Let's take a step back. HDR does indeed stand for high dynamic range. What is this? In scanner terms it's the value you should be looking for when you buy one. The higher the dynamic range value for a scanner, the greater the range of tones from dark to light that it can EXTRACT DETAIL FROM.

OK then, so all we're trying to do with HDR is extract detail from all the tones to present the image in the most natural way, i.e. how the human eye sees it but the camera can't capture it. If it doesn't look natural, you've overdone or underdone it.

Apparently there is specialist software available that can do this for you, or you can do it yourself in, say, Photoshop by carefully blending two or more images that you've captured with different exposures. Either way, the technique is another tool in your toolbox to help you produce the images you want, either natural looking or not. Your choice.
  • Sinem
  • 3 Apr 2006, 16:07
I think I prefer yesterday's, Duane, the colours were more natural and vivid.
  • Keith
  • Canada
  • 3 Apr 2006, 18:55
Arrived at this HDR discussion party late. I have only seen a couple of HDR images that I have really liked out of the rash that is spreading in blogland. I am not keen on either of these (but please keep experimenting and sharing with us)they look a little wishey washey and cardboard cut out to my eye. Its a great subject but it doesnt really do it justice and where are those clouds when you need them to break up the blue space where the sky should be. (no clouds in UK you were unlucky. I will have to try this myself one day but i am on a self imposed 'get it as good as I can out of camera' trip at the moment as I try to convince myself to sell my film cameras (well some of them) and adopt digital all the time.
  • Otto K
  • United States
  • 4 Apr 2006, 22:26
I much prefer yesterday's shot over this one. The colors in the sky and the building seem off in today's version.
thats cool i wish i could see places like that

Leave a comment

must fill in
[stop comment form]
show
for this photo I'm in a constructive critical comments icon ShMood©
camera Canon 10D
exposure mode
shutterspeed 1/250s
aperture f/8.0
sensitivity ISO100
focal length 17.0mm
Roppongi Hills SpiderRoppongi Hills S...
Twin towersTwin towers
Canterbury CathedralCanterbury Cathe...

Warning