Overproccesed Disaster - DPChallenge Forums

11/12/2008 12:37:39 PM · #26

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Thaddeus_Smith:
being new to photography doesnt mean i'm new to art or what is pleasing to the eye. i've never voted positively or negatively on an hdr image, because as previously noted ..i've never voted. i'm not here to be considerate, nor am i hear to act like i know everything. i'm simply voicing my opinion and general distaste for a processing technique that is far too over done by many a new photographer trying to be "cutting edge" or unique.

you guys really need to breathe out and relax. people seem to be just waiting to jump on top of anyone with a dissenting point of view.

Fine.....then take a pass on the image and don't vote on it at all.

But don't make a blanket statement like you'll vote any HDR image a zero and not expect to get slapped around.

Wait, we can vote 0 now? Why didn't anyone tell me???

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

11/12/2008 12:39:28 PM · #27

Originally posted by Thaddeus_Smith:

... so rather than voice my opinion by giving an image a poor score ...i'm supposed to pass on it and allow the self indulgent fart sniffing go unchecked?

LMAO! :-D

11/12/2008 12:40:26 PM · #28

for all of you without a sense of humor or irony ..im not going to be an asshole and blanket vote 0, or 1, or whatever the F is the lowest score. I was merely illustrating my severe disliking for the processing technique. very probably, I will continue my 0.000% vote average and continue to limit my own entries to those which lend themselves to a more artistic photography style.

11/12/2008 12:40:57 PM · #29

Originally posted by Thaddeus_Smith:

so rather than voice my opinion by giving an image a poor score ...i'm supposed to pass on it and allow the self indulgent fart sniffing go unchecked?

You do whatever you like.......just don't be surprised that with a closed mind and a bad attitude what a rough learning curve you'll have.

11/12/2008 12:41:35 PM · #30

The sea shore photo the bear posted could be post sunset and before dark, so that's within possible dynamic range. The first shot is overdone in my opinion.

I think what's being debated here is, does DPC vote for the content and photography of the shot anymore, or does one's post processing of the image take greater precedence?

Can a poorly framed/lit/subject with enough post processing get a reasonable score as opposed to someone who does less post processing, but spends more time getting a good framed/lit/subject matter shot?

This debate will go on forever, is a photo a photo, or is it art, and if it's art, what how far can one push the picture before it's no longer a photograph?

Thaddeus, I've seen some of your personal work and post processing, and to be so narrow as to not see a potential for some techniques will limit your own growth. We all have images that teeter on the line from what is a natural photo to being pushed beyond what the human eye could have actually seen.

It's neither right or wrong if you are looking to present your work one way or another, but I do agree that on DPC there are way to many images that score well based upon heavy post processing and less for what the actual image captured.

-danny

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

11/12/2008 12:43:37 PM · #31

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Thaddeus_Smith:
so rather than voice my opinion by giving an image a poor score ...i'm supposed to pass on it and allow the self indulgent fart sniffing go unchecked?

You do whatever you like.......just don't be surprised that with a closed mind and a bad attitude what a rough learning curve you'll have.

who said i was closed minded or had a bad attitude? i was voicing an opinion...is that not allowed anymore?? i've gone through countless HDR posts, messed around with photomatix and been generally unimpressed. lighten up! (or darken down?) (or dynamic range yourself?)

i'm a big fan of cross processing filters ..equally over done and poorly executed by many.

Message edited by author 2008-11-12 12:45:15.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

11/12/2008 12:44:03 PM · #32

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Fine.....then take a pass on the image and don't vote on it at all.

That's not really a fair statement either...

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and also allowed to voice that opinion via how they vote (although in this case he doesn't vote anyway...).

People already vote this way, and at times, thank goodness they do. Checks and balances. If everyone that can't stand to see another water drop shot just skipped voting on it we'd probably see an image break the 9+ scoring ceiling. That's just one example of many available.

MattO

Nikon D4

11/12/2008 12:44:12 PM · #33

Originally posted by violinist123:

Originally posted by MattO:
Although I dont vote HDR images down(I rarely vote anymore at all) I have to say that the HDR technique is overused, overdone, and quite frankly hurts my eyes. The human eye cannot normally see that range of colors, and when I see it, it almost makes me sick to my stomach, if I every actually saw either of those images in real life while walking around I'd certainly check my meds, or lay off the drugs that helped me see them.

Matt

I never understood how HDR/tone-mapping is in any way increasing the dynamic range of an image. Your camera has a limited dynamic range as does your output device, both of which fall far short of the human eye. Simply mapping a cartoonish palette of colors throughout the image doesn't change this. The only benefit it offers in my opinion is another special effect to increase the eye-candy factor of an image, if such candy happens to be to the viewer's taste.

The range that your eye can see in real life situations like that is much as your camera is. You have to take three or more shots to capture the same range as seen in these photos. Your eye would need to do the same(maybe not to as much of a degree) to see all of those tonal ranges in the same scene. You cannot get see all the highlights and shadow detail with your eye as you see in these processed photos, at the same time. Yes I can see them individually(either highlights or shadows) but not at the same time.

Matt

11/12/2008 12:44:35 PM · #34

His learning curve won't be limited... I can attest to that!

-danny

Ken

Canon EOS-7D

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

11/12/2008 12:46:18 PM · #35

Originally posted by violinist123:

You're right about the cartoonish effect, however when you use multiple exposures and combine them you are increasing the overall dynamic range of the photo.

chromeydome

Nikon D7000

11/12/2008 12:46:41 PM · #36

I think what you may be seeing with a 5ish score is just the way people vote in general: from the numerous threads on voting, it seems that technically okay images that have no specific wow or other positive impact on the viewer get a 5. They vote lower if the image is technically flawed, poorly composed, or distasteful to them. Images that exceed "average" go above 5.

My personal process is similar: My first voting pass I give lots of 5s to images that seem fine, but do not move me in any way. Images that are just technically poor get a 4, unless they are truly terrible, and I might go lower. Images that move me in this first pass easily get 6s and 7s. I then go back and expand the scale upward by re-viewing and re-voting any of the 6+ scoring puppies.

Using this approach, the OP's image got a solid 5 and no second look. I think 5 means "okay, I guess, but it didn't do anything for me"

As for HDR, I tend to prefer the images where it was used to overcome the dynamic range limitations, and allow the viewer to see a very natural view of the scene. As the processing gets more and more surreal, my interest goes down--unless the surreality is an essential element of the image.

Message edited by author 2008-11-12 12:48:37.

11/12/2008 12:46:47 PM · #37

Originally posted by crabappl3:

His learning curve won't be limited... I can attest to that!

-danny

How so?

11/12/2008 12:49:12 PM · #38

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by crabappl3:
His learning curve won't be limited... I can attest to that!

-danny

How so?

Because he researches and experiments and tries new things. He's not just sitting in his black and white world accepting that that's all there is to photography... plus, he and I are going to Palo Duro canyon in December to do some landscape photography, and I'll be sharing with him what I know about it... and I'm sure I'll learn a thing or two from him along the way.

-danny

11/12/2008 12:52:24 PM · #39

Whatever happened to using gradient neutral density filters instead of HDR? Which begs the question, is that wrong too since it brings the DR closer?

-danny

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

11/12/2008 12:54:25 PM · #40

Originally posted by crabappl3:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by crabappl3:
His learning curve won't be limited... I can attest to that!

-danny

How so?

Because he researches and experiments and tries new things. He's not just sitting in his black and white world accepting that that's all there is to photography... plus, he and I are going to Palo Duro canyon in December to do some landscape photography, and I'll be sharing with him what I know about it... and I'm sure I'll learn a thing or two from him along the way.

-danny

this is accurate. to go one step beyond ..i only upload about 2% of what i capture to the internet. the rest is boring, poorly executed, or just something i want to keep for myself. i don't see any value in proverbial vomiting on the world with every single picture i take. i'm on a b/w and cross processing kick right now. i'm trying to decide if candid/street photography is something i want to pursue. i'm tinkering with in-home studio stuff.

i've spent more time researching photography over the last 4 months than anything i've done in quite a while. but unlike many, i am not personally tied to my work or styles. critique it, PLEASE! i've not personally attacked anyone ..only shared an opinion on a processing technique; i expect the same in return.

chromeydome

Nikon D7000

11/12/2008 12:54:29 PM · #41

Originally posted by MattO:

The eyes are dynamically responding to the scene with an actively changing aperture and focus--depth of field in photography tends to compensate for that in the flat, 2d image, so your eye can meander over the image and see it in focus much as your eye would at the scene itself. Similarly, compensating for dynamic range in the image (from the old dodge/burn film/paper days) or digitally now, does a similar thing. Digital cameras have a greater dynamic range than film, but the resulting image file/print needs some help, as it will be seen in a uniform lighting, and your iris will not be able to compensate to find detail that is simply not represented. So HDR can be used to facilitate that.

It can also be way overdone...

11/12/2008 12:56:18 PM · #42

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Fine.....then take a pass on the image and don't vote on it at all.

Originally posted by glad2badad:

True......I just see red when people make comments like that.

My point by that comment was that rather than kind of maliciously vote down an image because you don't like it, either try and view its merits, or simply skip it.

Of course, I'm just projecting my own views.......I usually try to see if I can figure out what the photog was trying to accomplish. I've many times voted an image well that was well done from a technical aspect but just wasn't something that suited my taste.

I don't particularly like motion blur, but that last entry of Sandy's was freakin' awesome!

And that was because it was a masterfully done rendition. Most of that genre makes me about half seasick.

Anyway, I really meant it more as a, "Don't like it, move on." kind of thing than as a slur.

11/12/2008 12:58:19 PM · #43

Originally posted by crabappl3:

But if you dismiss something out of hand like he seems to be doing with HDR/tone mapping, there's a whole segment that he has lost.

And despite the tendency to be heavy handed, it does much in many instances that is truly nice.

11/12/2008 01:00:31 PM · #44

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by crabappl3:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by crabappl3:
His learning curve won't be limited... I can attest to that!

-danny

How so?

Because he researches and experiments and tries new things. He's not just sitting in his black and white world accepting that that's all there is to photography... plus, he and I are going to Palo Duro canyon in December to do some landscape photography, and I'll be sharing with him what I know about it... and I'm sure I'll learn a thing or two from him along the way.

-danny

But if you dismiss something out of hand like he seems to be doing with HDR/tone mapping, there's a whole segment that he has lost.

And despite the tendency to be heavy handed, it does much in many instances that is truly nice.

He's just starting in photography.. who knows, maybe in a few years he'll find an artistic use for HDR and will incorporate it. I know that most HDR look very unnatural to me, but there are some that are spectacular... I won't rule it out, but for me I prefer filters, and capturing the range in camera in one shot if possible.

-danny

11/12/2008 01:00:53 PM · #45

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

who said i was dismissing HDR out of hand? i've spent tons of time culling through examples, trying software, reading posts on the various forums. these are not flippant opinions or uneducated points i am making ...check your assumptions before voicing them.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

11/12/2008 01:01:26 PM · #46

Originally posted by MattO:

I'm not a doctor, but I seem to remember reading that the human eye handles about 20 stops of light to an average camera sensors 5-6 I can see details in dark shadows while still seeing details in extremely bright clouds, all in the same scene. My camera can't.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

11/12/2008 01:04:20 PM · #47

Originally posted by Thaddeus_Smith:

i've spent more time researching photography over the last 4 months than anything i've done in quite a while. but unlike many, i am not personally tied to my work or styles. critique it, PLEASE! i've not personally attacked anyone ..only shared an opinion on a processing technique; i expect the same in return.

I've spent better than double that learning how to use HDR and tone-mapping and I've become neither adept, nor quite knowledgeable at it.

Just like many things in life I've tried, as I learn, I discover more that I *DON'T* know.

You come along and make a statement like you did, I look at your profile and see you bio, and your work, and you just sounded pretty cavalier about something I take pretty seriously.

So a little respect for others' experience and opinions will take some of the edge off replies.

I apologize if it seems like I jumped on you, but from what I see offered up, it just sounded like your voting ethics left a lot to be desired.

Good luck with your endeavors.

Next time I read something I don't like, maybe I'll take a pass....8>)

MattO

Nikon D4

11/12/2008 01:06:14 PM · #48

Originally posted by violinist123:

Originally posted by MattO:

The range that your eye can see in real life situations like that is much as your camera is. You have to take three or more shots to capture the same range as seen in these photos. Your eye would need to do the same(maybe not to as much of a degree) to see all of those tonal ranges in the same scene. You cannot get see all the highlights and shadow detail with your eye as you see in these processed photos, at the same time. Yes I can see them individually(either highlights or shadows) but not at the same time.

Matt

I'm not a doctor, but I seem to remember reading that the human eye handles about 20 stops of light to an average camera sensors 5-6 I can see details in dark shadows while still seeing details in extremely bright clouds, all in the same scene. My camera can't.

Not at the same exact time you cant. You have to refocus and your pupil re adjusts to see that. For example, take your SO out on the porch on a bright day. Have her look to the sky(not into the sun) and watch her pupil, then have her look out into the neighbor hood, then have her look into a dark area, all the while watching her pupil. You will see why you think you can see all those ranges at the same time. Your eye(aperture ring) automatically adjust so you can see them in the same scene, but not at the same time.

If you can see all of those ranges at the same time, you must have one amazing life, because the whole world would be a walking cartoon, and that my friend has been my lifelong dream!

Matt

11/12/2008 01:10:12 PM · #49

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Thaddeus_Smith:
i've spent more time researching photography over the last 4 months than anything i've done in quite a while. but unlike many, i am not personally tied to my work or styles. critique it, PLEASE! i've not personally attacked anyone ..only shared an opinion on a processing technique; i expect the same in return.

I've spent better than double that learning how to use HDR and tone-mapping and I've become neither adept, nor quite knowledgeable at it.

Just like many things in life I've tried, as I learn, I discover more that I *DON'T* know.

You come along and make a statement like you did, I look at your profile and see you bio, and your work, and you just sounded pretty cavalier about something I take pretty seriously.

So a little respect for others' experience and opinions will take some of the edge off replies.

I apologize if it seems like I jumped on you, but from what I see offered up, it just sounded like your voting ethics left a lot to be desired.

Good luck with your endeavors.

Next time I read something I don't like, maybe I'll take a pass....8>)

and that's my entire point ...you're taking it TOO seriously. you are not your images. you are not your HDR. nor am i my black and whites. or my xpro's. danny gives me negative feedback 7 times out of 10 ...and when he doesn't, i ask him to look again and be sure. i am new to photography ..but i have a very strong eye on what is pleasing in architecture, interior design, graphics, paintings, etc. photography is a medium that i finally feel able to express that strong aesthetic, and i am working on minimizing my technical knowledge and experience as a hindrance. ...but that lack of experience doesn't negate my eye's ability to find what is pleasing. hdr, in my opinion, sits outside that realm of pleasing. it doesn't mean i dont like you, jeb, or your images ..i just don't think they merit more than a 1 in a competition not specifically FOR hdr.

it's a shame we have to wade through piles of shit to get to this point of clarity and understanding ...again, my constant underlying point.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D