Trey Ratcliff's HDR Photography.

When you say good HDR, I think of stuff like this guy:

http://www.johnmilesphotography.com/jmgallery/HDR/

Images that capture wider range tonality than what is capable with a digital camera (which is generally just five stops, iirc), but still look like a real scene.

I don't consider the stuff linked here as HDR except for one or two exceptions.... the colors are false, the light is inconsistent... it looks computer generated.

Nice photo, I like the accents

Get a life DJ.

DJ's not a moron, because when I do a google search on HRD photos, this isn't what I'm looking for.

Not that it's not a cool photo. But it's not HDR.

HDR id only a tool to either create an artistic piece as above or extend the range of "realistic" photography. I find your shot quite pleasant.

Sorry guys. Not good composition and HDR does nothing to help it. DJ is dead on about the abuses of HDR these days, and this is a prime example. Take a good look at the halo around the wind mill and building. That was never in the original shot at any exposure. Its an artifact from improper processing.

The Beauty of HDR is allowing the photographer to capture more of the composition. There is substantial loss here. Arguably corruption of the images.

If you want to chalk this up to artistic license, thats fine. But don't call it great HDR. Call it great art.

Yes, I think Ratcliff's work is a bit overdone.

Terrible, sorry. I thought it was a collage of several shots stuck together, which is what I see often with poor hdr examples.