Comments on: Trey Ratcliff’s HDR Photography.

By: Drew77

Drew77 — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 14:15:33 +0000

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

By: Heather

Heather — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:04:09 +0000

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

By: Ben McBeen

Ben McBeen — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 05:39:59 +0000

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.

By: Clay

Clay — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:53:28 +0000

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.

By: Jackson2

Jackson2 — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:03:50 +0000

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.

By: DJ is a moron

DJ is a moron — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:05:53 +0000

Get a life DJ.

By: Stock Photo Rx

Stock Photo Rx — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:25:15 +0000

Nice photo, I like the accents

By: DJ

DJ — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:22:08 +0000

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.