Sorry, if I have offended anyone. I can be a bit brusque sometimes.
I really was just trying to help, but I was getting a bit fed up with being misquoted, or with people clearly not reading the thread properly.

Now I'll shut up

So I use the phrase 'Pseudo HDR' and this thread turns into an HDR discussion.

I was just talking about recovering the original detail from ONE file. we all do it.
Why has this thread become so polarised....and I'm not talking about bloody polarising filters

You don't have to have washed out sky, bleached roof tops and blown highlights, just to recover a bit of paintwork on the underside of a helicopter. And it doesn't have to look unatural.

I don't need to tinker with it. look for yourself - the information is present in both 'offending' parts of the image.
Merge them (pseudo HDR) and you will have the best of both worlds.
If your particular photo looks a little weird after this treatment, then just tone down your processing until it is more natural.

If I have to tweak this to prove what you can see with your own eyes then I will need the raw file.

You can win !!
Just do as I suggest and you'll have the best of both worlds.

Don't over do it tho' unless you want a sureal image.

edit: or buy a Metz 58 AF-1 - cracking flash
edit again ! actually that would be rubbish here on the shiny metal ... I'll shut up now

OK, let me be more specific for the pedants.
The linked image is now predominently washed out and too bright.
Highlights have been clipped.

A more selective levels job would have been more apropriate using a levels adjustment layer. (or two developments of the raw file merged together)

You must have a very dark monitor then Hyram

Excellent judging gartmore, is there anything you don't know? I feel if I get a comment from you I will know exactly what to do... Perfect.
Gully's was my fav too.

I spent the morning on Plymouth Hoe surrounded by thousands of people and got nothing worth keeping, let alone entering, so well done to those who did manage.

yes I wasn't sure if this could have been caused by a cloud, but the rest of the building is bright and the shadow from the tower is strong so the front of the tower and tip should be brighter I think. I can't put my finger on it but it looks kind of blotchy and inconsistent. Sorry, that's not meant to be harsh, it's quite possible for it to be a natural occurance, but sometimes it takes someone else to look over your shoulder and see something.

that's a good effort Nimitz. With HDR it's always tricky dealing with things that stick up into a bright sky, and you've pulled this off reasonably well - not too sureal.
The first one is good but I would loose the sky down the right side.
and the second could do with a little more work on the tower as it doesn't 'read' quite right.
Lots of potential here ready for that perfect shot when only HDR can cut it.
It's so easy to go overboard and come up with some shockers so I think you are heading in the right direction.

once you've bought your big heavy tripod, you will then need to stop the wind blowing....
if you are only going to view them on screen (small) then boosting the ISO is acceptable, otherwise you're stuck with 100 ISO for creamy backgrounds.
Boosting the iSO will enable more DOF.