I think whether you need to use HDR for an image like this depends a lot on the camera used. If the camera uses only a 12 bit A/D converter, then the dynamic range is limited to an absolute maximum of 12 stops, whereas 14 bit capture extends that to a theoretical 14 stops. In practice this means that you can drag a lot more useable shadow detail out of a 14 bit RAW file than you can out of a 12 bit one, and this may make all the difference as to whether you need a second (HDR) exposure or not. I really noticed this when I moved from a Mk1 Canon 5D to a Nikon D700. The amount of extra shadow detail in a RAW file was astounding.
Since Olympus are tight-lipped about the bit-depth of the E510, one can only assume that it uses 12 bit capture, and a 14 bit camera may well have made a much better job of retaining the highlights while still allowing the shadow detail to be brought out.
The limitations of HDR are that you can't have a moving subject or easily use handheld exposures at lowish shutter speeds. If Tom didn't have a tripod, or tripod photography wasn't allowed, then HDR exposures just wouldn't have been an option. Given that the exposure time required was 1/50th of a second, two consecutive handheld exposures would have been almost impossible to align properly, leading to poor definition in the final image.
Having seen the original file, I think that Tom has done an excellent job of turning it into a decent picture. I think that you might have saved yourself a bit of work though Tom, simply by using the eraser tool to rub through from the adjustment layer to the original window detail underneath. This avoids any fancy blending work.
Mount Saint Michel - Window
in Architecture
Posted
I think whether you need to use HDR for an image like this depends a lot on the camera used. If the camera uses only a 12 bit A/D converter, then the dynamic range is limited to an absolute maximum of 12 stops, whereas 14 bit capture extends that to a theoretical 14 stops. In practice this means that you can drag a lot more useable shadow detail out of a 14 bit RAW file than you can out of a 12 bit one, and this may make all the difference as to whether you need a second (HDR) exposure or not. I really noticed this when I moved from a Mk1 Canon 5D to a Nikon D700. The amount of extra shadow detail in a RAW file was astounding.
Since Olympus are tight-lipped about the bit-depth of the E510, one can only assume that it uses 12 bit capture, and a 14 bit camera may well have made a much better job of retaining the highlights while still allowing the shadow detail to be brought out.
The limitations of HDR are that you can't have a moving subject or easily use handheld exposures at lowish shutter speeds. If Tom didn't have a tripod, or tripod photography wasn't allowed, then HDR exposures just wouldn't have been an option. Given that the exposure time required was 1/50th of a second, two consecutive handheld exposures would have been almost impossible to align properly, leading to poor definition in the final image.
Having seen the original file, I think that Tom has done an excellent job of turning it into a decent picture. I think that you might have saved yourself a bit of work though Tom, simply by using the eraser tool to rub through from the adjustment layer to the original window detail underneath. This avoids any fancy blending work.