Wheal Coates, North Cornwall

I took this on Monday night, Wheal Coates North coast, second serious shot at HDR with Photomatix
3 frames - 2 stops apart -f/11. 100iso
Sigma 10-20mm

Just HDR them, tonemapped and dodge the building a bit, no other magic.

What do you think, does it work?

Lilly

It's quite a striking picture, but obviously HDR. Dare I say that it would look good in mono?

G

I really like it, the shades of orange and petrol blue in the sky (and reflected in the water) make me wish I were there to see it in person - I can almost feel a gentle breeze taking the edge off a scorching day.

As for the HDR aspect, I wouldn't have noticed it if you hadn't said, but I consider that a good thing as I'm not hugely fond of some of the more "extreme" HDR shots I've seen.

Big thumbs up all round from me!

I think it's beautiful.

Lovely image , Would look great framed large on a plain wall.

I have not tried HDR yet ...will have a go at some time I guess.

I guess a purist would argue that with HDR you are throwing away the natural affect of shadow. No different to fill in flash I suppose.

Lovely Lilly.

I like the HDR effect - gives a very good scene. Nice light.

How many shots did you use.?

Very nice picture. I have a "thing" about converging verticals with buildings so I'd straighten it a bit, but that's just me!

My opinion as well.

Can I ask what HDR is?

I think it's pretty much perfect as it is.

HDR = High Dynamic Range.

A HDR image is done by blending 3 or more shots of the same subject. You do it with software. I use Photomatix (www.hdrsoft.com) other uses Photoshop CS3 or other programs.

Try google HDR to see the effects you can produce. Some prefer natural effects with a better tonal range (used in scenes where the camera can not give the perfect shot - eg. a burned out sky and a correct exposed building - blending shots makes it possible to get the correct shot overall), other use the hdr effect to produce shots a bit like cartoons. Loads of potential - but hard to master.

Sorry I am tardy in replying, thanks for answering Teds ? for me!, been up to my eyes this week.
I just took the 3 exposures this time, 2 stops apart.

As I am now getting into this the only problem I can see and I feel detracts from HDR is that even when using the tripod once the image is tonemapped, it looks kind of soft and is not very easy to sharpen without an element of noise. Has anyone else noticed this?

Thank you for you comments, I think HDR definitely has a place in my book, especially for these type of images where a lot of detail is lost, which is a loss I think. I do think the process is attractive when not over used.

Lilly

Hideous Disastrous Results
But obviously not when Lilly takes it on

Nice capture Lilly I think the building needs to be a tad darker. then it will throw the hounds of the scent that it is HDR (no George I'm not calling you a hound )

I still like it as it is though, I'd cetainly hang it on my wall.

PS; I dont mind the converging verticals.

This is another I took same evening, further down the cliff, 3 exposures again, f/11.0, @ 1/8s; 1/4s; 0.3s; 100iso. 10-20 sigma.
Has a different mood and atmosphere to this one.

I much prefer this second shot Lilly, the building just has that bit more punch to it and the lead in from the path makes for a much better composition. The skys not as dramatic but the extra interest in the sea makes up for it.

All I can say is watch out Joe Cornish

Noise can be a problem for sure. I haven't found a way to avoid it yet.

I do no find problems with softness - well at times movement in gras, sea or skies produce softer images. I don't find buildings and so soft.

Perhaps you think it is soft - do to the way the picture shows. Edges are not crisp as usual because you increase the tonal range in the edges. This could be a problem or a bonus - depending on how you see the shot.

E.g. a shadow on a single shot is crisp and sharp. On a HDR you tonal range makes it softer and perhaps ligther than usual.

I'm not sure this covers your issues - but it could be this.