HDR.. is it just hype?

[cameracrack]

<p>I was kinda disappointed after already ordering my D7000 that it didn't have HDR. I didn't really know what HDR was, I just knew it was something that newer cameras had. But I stuck with my D7000 because I liked it for so many other reasons.</p>

<p>Since then I have seen many HDR photos on Tumblr and on Flickr. I don't really see what the big deal is. Yea, the colors are vivid but they also look over saturated and in a lot of cases.. digitally created. I mean it's not what was actually there when the person took the photo. Most photos, though they are beautiful (in most cases) they give me that "something's not right" feeling, someone got adjustments happy in Photoshop. It also seems to me like it's something that you can duplicate in Photoshop.</p>

<p>Maybe it's just me, but I like it when I take photos look as close to what I saw and made me want to take the photo in the first place. Is there more to it, or is this just a fad that seems to not be going away as it gains popularity? </p>

 

[drjoder]

<p>Not all HDR photos have those wild colors. A lot of folks use HDR techniques simply to make sure they capture as much of the dynamic range of the scene as possible. I have seen many images in which you could not really tell that HDR was used--I'm kinda with you in that I prefer that kind of HDR..the more natural look. Yes, occasionally those wild images are fun to look at, but they also grow a bit old after awhile. Another similar technique that is very useful (one I am trying to master) is simply blending two images, one exposed for the highlights and one exposed for the shadows. In those high contrast situations (assuming your scene is pretty much static) this may be an option. They have sort of an HDR option in my D90 that I tried when I first got the camera...you select the images you want to combine and it merges them--I don't remember being very impressed at the time. Seems like most serious folks use something like Photomatix to do it in post. BTW, that D7000 seems like a super camera...if I had known it was just around the corner when I purchased my D90 I would have waited. Have fun with it!</p>

[michaelging]

<p>HDR is a photographic tool that does not come with any camera. Its a method of technique that lets a photographer be more creative. No different than sepia toning a B&W photo, or solarizing a print, using Infrared camera or film. It has a place for the creative photographer, who wants something more than a snapshot. If its not something you need for to express your creativity, then don't use it. I am sure you will find something else that you will be attracted to. </p>

[bill_brooks]

<p>I think you are on to something. There is an artificial aspect to my eye with many of the HDR generated images. I am not a pro photographer, though I am a passionate amateur (love working with my new D7000 by the way).<br>

I am, though, a professional artist/ artisan working in several other mediums, and feel qualified in stating my opinion that if any art form conveys a contrivance of methodology, it overpowers the desire to create a beautiful image or form. It's like laying too much color onto a canvas or too bright a patina on a bronze- it just takes over the sensibility of the viewer and distracts the mind. The eye can aesthetically perceive things quicker and better than the mind can understand them, in many cases.<br>

In short, the HDR images make my eye lose focus on the form and composition, and forces me to try to make sense of the layering of the image. Just my opinion. Art is in the eye of each beholder differently; I just agree with where you are going, Liana.</p>

[james_c1]

<p>Michael Is correct HDR does not come with the camera.<br>

It is accomplished with a series of exposures that are combined. It can be done with any digital camera.( or combination of digital files) There is photo software that combines the images. I am not the person to ask but I just wanted you to know that it can be done with any camera that you can bracket or adjust exposures so don’t worry.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>HDR with a Nikon DSLR is easy - just set it to bracket at +-2 or 3 stops and fire a 3-shot burst. Run the shots through your choice of HDR software. Be prepared for some artificial looking kicked up colors and DR. For example, <a href=" one I did with my D90</a> and Photoshop. But was it really necessary? <a href=" the same scene</a> with one raw shot and a circular polarizing filter.</p>

[luke_kaven]

<p>It would be a mistake to identify HDR with bad pictures done using extreme tonemapping settings. In the end, you can do any number of things with HDR if you understand it. Most don't understand it. It is a technology that has many uses and for that reason, it will be with us for some time. In the end, it is not the technique used, but whether or not it serves an artistic purpose. </p>

[georges_pelpel]

<p>Liana,<br /> HDR means High Dynamic Range referring to the number of various shades of gray the camera sensor is able to reproduce. In the old film world it used to be called film latitude.<br /> The human eye, the most sophisticated lens ever designed (well some animals have even better eyes than us), can see a range of 12 to 14 levels of gray from pure white to pure black. Film has a much limited range, about 8-9 for negative film, about 5-6 for slide film. Digital sensor were more in the 4-5 in the early days and probably 6-7 this days.<br /> Photographers used tricks to extend film range in the lab with pushing or pulling film development and with dodging and burning at print time. We also use graduated neutral density filters at shoot time to darken bright areas such as the sky.<br /> In the digital world it's called HDR and done in the computer using one image or with multiples copies of the same image shot at different expositions.<br /> Newer cameras now incorporate special built-in software that automatically opens shadows and darkens highlights extending the latitude or dynamic range of the sensor. It's called by different names depending of the camera manufacturer. For Nikon the name is Active D-Lighting. And, yes, your D7000 has this function.<br /> The default setting if OFF, so you need to go into your camera setting menu and turn Active D-Lighting on. On my D300 I have different setting options; normal, high, and low. I am not sure which option the D7000 has but I would start with test all settings and leave the camera on the option you like the most. On the D300 it is very effective.<br /> Active D-lighting gives a very natural look nothing like most HDR images you see in magazines. HDR software can also achieve natural results, it's a choice you make at post processing time. It's a great tool but, I agree with you, most often overused. But again it also has some creative values for special effects.</p>

[yellowwoodguiding]

<p>As other posters have noted HDR is a post processing option. One of a few techniques we can use to control images with dynamic range beyond what your camera can record. As a photographer you need to come up with a solution that will work for your subjects when you have too much dynamic range (simply put, brights too bright next darks too dark) <br>

HDR like any art form has styles, many folks go too surrealistic, but you can make it look real. To me the best HDR are images you can't tell have been produced with HDR.<br>

As a nature photographer I use a combination of HDR, Graduated Neutral Density filters, and dual image masking to get a shot that looks natural. Each option is in my tool bag to allow me to create the shot I want given the light and weather conditions. Here in the Rockies HDR fails when the trees and grass blown in the wind. Today wind speeds were 20-50mph, so during those situation I used graduated filters.</p>

[cameracrack]

<p>Thanks everyone for clarifying that it's not in the camera that you get HDR. I guess that is what I get for reading random Nikon blogs.</p>

<p>Well I am glad that I am not the only one that feels this way. I an also an artist (drawing and painting), photography was always my hobby but I have been taking it serious for sometime now. I know when something just isn't right. I've come from using film cameras and post work is and was always light. To me, if a photo needed too much tweeking in post then it wasn't a very good photo in the first place. That is just my own standards that I hold myself to.</p>

<p>Now that I know that HDR is something that I can get to work for me, I wouldn't mind trying it out.</p>

<p>I am enjoying my D7000, it's an amazing camera. I'm glad I chose it. Thanks again for all your responses! I enjoyed reading them all! It's nice to know I'm not alone in my thinking. </p>

 

[cameracrack]

<p>BTW Andy, those are both beautiful photos. Was it necessary? That is the question..</p>

[dan_south]

<p>There are different ways to make an HDR photo. The wild colors usually come from programs that attempt to automate the process. More realistic results come from combining layers in Photoshop, or the old-fashioned method of using filters (which I still use, being old-fashioned).</p>

<p>The D7000 is an excellent camera. Enjoy it and learn as much as you can about how to use it, and it will serve you very well.</p>

[phule]

<p>[[in the digital world it's called HDR and done in the computer using one image]]</p>

<p>By definition you cannot produce an HDR image from a single file.</p>

[frank_skomial]

<p>Liana,<br>

Do not despair, your camera has the HDR feature built in, like some other Nikon higher end cameras.<br>

Read your D7000 camera manual on page 152. It is not called HDR but rather called by more meaningful name that explains what it does.<br>

It is called multiple exposure, where many exposures are taken fast, with your varying exposure parameters, and folded into one picture, providing better dynamic range and better colors. See what Nikon says about it. Perhaps there is an example, like in D300S /D700 manuals, how to inspect each exposure or picture in the series, that contributes to your final better picture. Read your camera manual, as it is your best adviser.</p>

<p><em>"Michael Is correct HDR does not come with the camera</em>" - both Michael and Greg ara not correct. <br>

People, you must know your cameras, to use them to full potentials.</p>

[georges_pelpel]

<p>Liana, did you read my comment regarding Active D-Lighting? That's Nikon's built-in HDR and it's part of the D7000.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>The Active D-Lighting option mimics the effect of some post processing techniques including tone mapping a single image, using the "clarify" filter, or using a contrast masking technique with unsharp masking.</p>

<p>Those and true HDR techniques are merely that - techniques, tools to be used as the photographer chooses. The only "hype" involved is that these techniques are very popular on discussion forums around the web, and many photographers enjoy using (and occasionally abusing) them. It's no different than similar techniques many of us used in the darkroom, although the digital editing is much more efficient and consistent than the extensive manipulations used by master printers to custom print a series of fine art prints, each of which demands attempting to duplicate the effect consistently on each print.</p>

[georges_pelpel]

<p>[by definition you cannot produce an HDR image from a single file.]<br>

Not exactly true.<br>

PS5 HDR function can work on a single shot.<br>

If you shoot in RAW you can also open the same image using different exposure settings in two separate windows. Then you can copy one of them on the other and end up with two layers from which you can delete the parts that are better on the other layer. You can actually have as many layers as needed.</p>

[luke_kaven]

<p>A key concept for naturalists who want to understand HDR. </p>

<p>You use supersampling of a scene in order to increase the fidelity of capture as well as the dynamic range. This gives you more precision in all tones, including the "low" tones. The HDR file is partly a way to allocate more bits to image cells regardless of where in the scale of absolute magnitude they fall. This is why we work with 32 bit floating point files (96 bits per RGB pixel). You can achieve phenomenal fidelity in the low tones of your image this way. </p>

[michael_notar1]

<p>i would like to know what software/settings to use to get realist looking photos. i am professional and i am old school per say, i dont like the over manipulated look of hdr most of the time. i currently use photomatix and have some settings that are less intense saved but still surreal looking. reds are always insanely saturated, other colors are highly saturated too. i havent used the software much, maybe 20 successful instances at most.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Fact is, subtle HDR can do wonders for a photo, extreme HDR can make an image that looks like it belongs in a comic book.</p>

<p>I avoid it most of the time. Just a little digital dodging and burning is all I generally do.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Knowing how and when to use HDR photography can generate nice quality images under the right circumstances. Many image processing programs now offer simple single image HDR processing.</p>

<p>According to this article, 'The Pentax K7 is the first camera that has honest to goodness tone mapping built-in to it’s microcode'.</p>

<p><a href="http://photographyforrealestate.net/2009/06/02/the-first-camera-with-built-in-hdr/">http://photographyforrealestate.net/2009/06/02/the-first-camera-with-built-in-hdr/</a></p>

[waltflanagan]

<p>There are quite a few point and shoots with built in HDR. They will take a series of photos at different exposures and blend them together. Most serious photographers would prefer to do this on their computer where they have much more control but the fact is it does exist in some cameras. Many of these also have built in panorama stitching where you pan the camera and it takes multiple shots and stitches them together. There are also apps for the iPhone to do these as well. That said I have zero interest in doing anything in camera including making a JPEG.</p>

<p> </p>

[lachaine]

<p>You do NOT need an HDR function on a camera. It's just a featuritis item on point & shoot cameras, although on those, it does serve a purpose in that it can allow some low light shots that would otherwise not be possible without excessive noise.</p>

<p>The fewer gimmick features on DSLRs the better. HDR is better done off the camera anyway.</p>

<p>HDR is usually way overdone, but if used intelligently when needed, it's just one of many occasionally useful techniques, just like using more than one exposure or sandwiching negatives was with film. </p>

 

[phule]

<p>[[Not exactly true.<br /> PS5 HDR function can work on a single shot.]]</p>

<p>No, it is very much true. Your example is not HDR. If the dynamic range of the scene exceeds that of the capture medium then how could you possibly capture the entire range in one image file? You can't. A single RAW file has only a portion of the full dynamic range. You cannot squeeze blood from a stone, George. By definition, an HDR image must come from more than one photo.</p>

<p> </p>

[akshun]

Id say if you dont like HDR images, then dont look.

What about the "monochrome" setting in your D7000? will you ever use that?

I dont know any eye that just sees Black and white.... furthermore, you say "good" picture in one of

your posts, what constitutes a "good" picture anyway? who is anyone to judge an artists creation?

Would you be happy if your D7000 came with just a shutter release, standard 200 iso and standard pic

control??? i didnt think so.

Did you know that images were blended for years in film?? that is where bracketing comes from, yes

the film days, to capture all the light and shadow detail of the scene.

Where would we be now if we had of discarded that type of shooting and ignored the limitless

possibilities of the artform??

Forgive me if i sound harsh, but you must support all forms of the industry, new ideas are good ideas

and help the photography industry to grow and produce new and exciting products for many to enjoy.

I make alot of my images from bracketed exposure, not because i love to distort them or make them

look "fake" but because it adds to the image, making it stronger in some cases and more interesting to

look at.