|
|
Posted by tiffers
IMO, if you can tell at quick glance it's HDR...you're doing it wrong...
|
Just what I was about to post. The best HDR is not immediately obvious it's HDR.
| |
Posted by siper
Totally agree. One aspect of this though is that those decisions will position you differently in the eyes of your peers. For example, clown vomit will get you burned at stake among photographers. Taking shit photos on a potato will get you more respect than clown vomit. So yes, create photos you're happy with but everyone should understand WHY they're getting the responses they're getting if they abuse HDR. They should also understand it's not HDR's fault...it's theirs.
|
It all goes back to doing what you want to do rather than what you want to hear from your peers (respect or complaints). Some people detest HDR, others enjoy seeing or using it.
Think of musicians: Some musicians are against techno and electronic because it uses technology for much of the sound. True musicians who play bass, guitar or drums use the instruments directly without technology.
Yet there are large followers of electronic music. Armin Van Buuren will never have the respect of all the musicians out there, but he enjoys what he's doing and he has happy followers.
Is HDR abused? Sure. Do some people dislike it? Absolutely, but it's a way for 'artists' to alter their work. Ugly watermarks that take up a third of the image might also bring criticism, but at the end of the day it's a hobby and there is no real 'right' or 'wrong' way to do it. It's what YOU want to do. Fuck the critics.
If you go into the hobby expecting respect for all you do, it's going to be one disappointment after the other. Respect is nice to have, but you need to please yourself over anybody else and realize no matter what you do, you'll always have some negativity out there.
If not HDR then watermarks, then orientation, then crooked images, then too much light blowout in a window, then distortion, then weak composition, then....
And there's also going to be people who'll praise and Like your work no matter what it is because of a sense of loyalty. There'll also be those who refuse to acknowledge your work or cast negativity upon it simply for who you are, not the images. We've seen it all on the forums.
Just. Do. What. Makes. You. Happy.
[last edit 6/25/2015 7:17 PM by Intrinsic - edited 1 times]
| |
If you're not happy with your HDR results you could just try to dodge and burn manually, it's a pain in the arse to be sure, and you won't get as many stops out of it, but it can help control overblown highlights, or shadows that are too dark.
| |
I can't agree with the 'do what you wanna do and fuck the critics' advice, it's just not the way the world works. Sure, if you're really convinced of your work you should embrace it, but if there's a crowd saying it's crap then you should think twice the next time you're out shooting. It's how we learn and set new standards. We all went through that HDR clown vomit phase, we all got harsh criticism and started to realise that it's indeed not what we want our photos to look like. And a few of us decided to hold on to it because they truly like it, and they are pretty much always the people who end up master it without the clown vomit. That's what I love about criticism, at first it might be shocking, then it makes you think and then you can decide to embrace it or dump it.
The thing with HDR is, it's pretty cool but call it digital art or something. It's not a great way of showing the natural beauty of something, it's more like making a psychedelic digital painting that has nothing to do with reality. That's probably why the serious explorers and photographers hate it, we just want to see the natural beauty of a building and not funky art with a photo buried somewhere under the layers of clown vomit. The non-photographer/explorer crowd probably thinks 'ok, cool psychedelic weird glowing image'.
www.basdemos.com | |
Posted by sirpsychosexy
I can't agree with the 'do what you wanna do and fuck the critics' advice, it's just not the way the world works. Sure, if you're really convinced of your work you should embrace it, but if there's a crowd saying it's crap then you should think twice the next time you're out shooting. It's how we learn and set new standards. We all went through that HDR clown vomit phase, we all got harsh criticism and started to realise that it's indeed not what we want our photos to look like. And a few of us decided to hold on to it because they truly like it, and they are pretty much always the people who end up master it without the clown vomit. That's what I love about criticism, at first it might be shocking, then it makes you think and then you can decide to embrace it or dump it.
The thing with HDR is, it's pretty cool but call it digital art or something. It's not a great way of showing the natural beauty of something, it's more like making a psychedelic digital painting that has nothing to do with reality. That's probably why the serious explorers and photographers hate it, we just want to see the natural beauty of a building and not funky art with a photo buried somewhere under the layers of clown vomit. The non-photographer/explorer crowd probably thinks 'ok, cool psychedelic weird glowing image'.
|
Very well put. If you have no desire to improve your photography, you can continue saying "fuck the critics." If you have that desire...listen to the critics who take better photos than you. If you're not happy on one of those paths, try the other one.
Want to improve your photography?
Flickr
| |
Posted by siper
Very well put. If you have no desire to improve your photography, you can continue saying "fuck the critics." If you have that desire...listen to the critics who take better photos than you. If you're not happy on one of those paths, try the other one.
|
But who is to say the person being critical is taking better photos than you? I wasn't aware we'd established that. Who is to say that person is even a photographer and not the consumer who likes your prints just as they are?
Who is to say all criticism is fair and unbiased? Do people always give fair feedback without prejudice and maliciousness? What if the consumer enjoys subtle HDR or even full blown Crayon-explosion HDR and they sell a lot of prints? Should one change what makes them happy (and money) for sake of someone else's advice?
Some people actually enjoy using HDR - in fact many people on this forum use it. They know people don't like HDR yet are they in need of improving their skills? Perhaps they have the skills but choose to shoot in that format.
Fuck the critics. It's a hobby, it's open to interpretation. It's being yourself even if it's 2000 shades of Crayola dripping in every pixel 
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
| |
Posted by Intrinsic
But who is to say the person being critical is taking better photos than you? I wasn't aware we'd established that.
|
I can tell by looking at their photos if a photographer is better than I am.
Fuck the critics. It's a hobby, it's open to interpretation. It's being yourself even if it's 2000 shades of Crayola dripping in every pixel
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
|
Ain't nothing wrong with that.
It's a hobby for me. But it's a hobby that I take seriously and want to always improve at it. For me, that means taking people's advice that I trust and experimenting with new techniques because I want to get better. That may not be what other people want to do, which is totally fine. I know art is supposed to be open to interpretation but let's not bullshit ourselves: there's good art and there's bad art. Clown vomit is not good art...it's lazy art for those who don't know any better. HDR, when used properly can create very good art.
Want to improve your photography?
Flickr
| |
HDR does NOT have to suck. It only sucks when people choose to make it so.
| |
I'm going to HDR my watermark
Flickr Pitchrs | |
Posted by skatchkins
I'm going to HDR my watermark
|
Only if it uses two thirds of the image please. That's my critique to you
[last edit 6/26/2015 8:43 PM by Intrinsic - edited 1 times]
| |
So you guys are telling me I shouldn't submit this masterpiece to the IPA?
Haha, kidding...
I took the most idiotic possible photo and ran every shit processing method on it that I could think of. Wait - damn! I forgot the watermark.
Absolutely great points to ponder (and some killer quotations) throughout this thread. Thanks for all the input, and please 'Like' my photo above so I can enough points for a possible Lucie award!
If you're seeing this here on UER, please let me 'Follow' your work on Flickr: https://www.flickr...otos/91808861@N04/ | |
Best HDR ever. Do you mind if I post it in my "anti-HDR" facebook group?
Rise before Zod
Kneel before Zod
www.mycophagia.com | |
Posted by General Zod
Do you mind if I post it in my "anti-HDR" facebook group?
|
Haha, I didn't even know there was such a group. Please do,
I'm sure they appreciate the heck of out it!
If you're seeing this here on UER, please let me 'Follow' your work on Flickr: https://www.flickr...otos/91808861@N04/ | |
Posted by Ground State
Haha, I didn't even know there was such a group. Please do lighten up??
I'm sure people would appreciate the heck of out of my own group!
|
LOL Best group ever, actually. I could care less about maintaining the thing actually, but one might as well make it a THING right?! LOL
https://www.facebo...oups/211025964177/
Rise before Zod
Kneel before Zod
www.mycophagia.com |
Add a poll to this thread
This thread is one of your Favourites. Click to make normal.Click to make this thread a Favourite.
| This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private. |
Powered by AvBoard AvBoard version 1.5 alpha
Page Generated In: 62 ms
|
|
Ethics
