Post Challenge Wow I am somewhat surprised that this actually scored almost a 5.5. I wanted to see by entering this photo that was obviously far from the original what the voters would think. It got almost exactly in the middle (49% percentile) with a score just above the median. I am sure if I had entered more of the "true" photograph of this scene my score would have been down by at least 0.5. I think the voters here on DPC no longer care that much about "true" photography as much as it may seem sometimes from forum discussions. I just found this whole thing interesting.
Without this heavy of processing this photo isn't really good at all, the composition might be the strongest thing going for it. It was the middle of the afternoon, bright sun/sky and no clouds. And without the processing all the brush and trees are really distracting (to me at least).
Do people vote according to the processing they see?
Post Challenge Wow I am somewhat surprised that this actually scored almost a 5.5. I wanted to see by entering this photo that was obviously far from the original what the voters would think. It got almost exactly in the middle (49% percentile) with a score just above the median. I am sure if I had entered more of the "true" photograph of this scene my score would have been down by at least 0.5. I think the voters here on DPC no longer care that much about "true" photography as much as it may seem sometimes from forum discussions. I just found this whole thing interesting.
Without this heavy of processing this photo isn't really good at all, the composition might be the strongest thing going for it. It was the middle of the afternoon, bright sun/sky and no clouds. And without the processing all the brush and trees are really distracting (to me at least).
Justin, Most of the people here fall into the catagory of "supportive". I think they approved your photo as an artistic endeavour. They are generally nice people who only become bloodthirsty when they feel that an entry is not a persons best effort. 'cours this is just my opinion.
Like I said, I just found it all interesting. [/quDo people vote according to the processing they see?
Justin, Most of the people here fall into the catagory of "supportive". I think they approved your photo as an artistic endeavour. They are generally nice people who only become bloodthirsty when they feel that an entry is not a persons best effort. 'cours this is just my opinion.
i'm so tired of black&white images . I will automatically vote 0 on any image I see with this style of processing, hence forth. ;-)
Came on, HDR is just another style, maybe you like it or not but keep always in mind that there is an efford from the photographer behind the image. Vote 1 for any HDR image just for being HDR is simply overkill.
I agree with Justin, people vote higher overprocessed images than those natural looking images and maybe for more than 0,5.
Came on, HDR is just another style, maybe you like it or not but keep always in mind that there is an efford from the photographer behind the image. Vote 1 for any HDR image just for being HDR is simply overkill.
We've GOT to stop doing that... HDR is NOT a "style", it's a processing technique for expanding the dynamic range of the digital medium. What people are objecting to, most of the time, when they say they "hate HDR" is images that have been TONE MAPPED to the point of being cartoonish. Tone mapping is the final step in producing and HDR image; once the expanded dynamic range has been established and displayed on the screen, tone mapping is the means by which it is compressed so the entire range can be displayed at once.
Like any other tool, tone mapping can be used subtly or it can be overdone. Like any other technique, HDR imaging can be used "naturally" or "unnaturally", at the artist's discretion. There are a LOT of HDR images out there that you'd never know were HDR unless you saw the original for comparison.
And, in any event, the image that sparked this thread isn't an HDR image as far as I can tell; it shows none of the characteristic hallmarks of HDR processing, which usually (when overdone) produces an unnatural flatness between highlights and shadows and then, if aggressively tone mapped, produces unnaturally heightened contrast within this flattened image.
*********
Incidentally, regarding the image itself, I quite like it; it seems appropriate to the challenge, it is moody and mysterious. Heavily-processed, sure; but at the same time, a reasonably effective work of art. I don't see anything "wrong" with taking "bad" pictures (flat light, distracting elements, whatever) and working them over in PP to produce interesting, even compelling, images...
i would agree ..this looks more like an image that has been squeezed through topaz adjust. both techniques are on my shit list of over (and poorly) done applications.
Interesting experiment. I've done similar with similar results. I threw this quick snapshot from the side of the road into a freestudy and it performed similarly to yours. Lots of bold colors pleasing colors and patterns, but still just a quick snapshot with little thought. HotPasta left a comment that echoed my own feelings about it.
you're entitled to your opinion, as am i. ..even a bad b/w image is better than an "ok" HDR image ..
So just to be clear on this, these are "bad" photographs in your eyes?
R.
yes .. they are. it's like they can't decide to either be a processed piece of art or a representation of reality. the eye doesn't see such landscapes like those images depict. again ..opinions, mine, etc.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It's your statement that you want to learn it all......except that you really don't.
But don't make a blanket statement like you'll vote any HDR image a zero and not expect to get slapped around.
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.
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?
