I seriously doubt of the use and application of HDR in portraiture.
For so many reasons.

Nathan

Try clone tool, and carefully clone on the lighter parts, by selecting the arch around the burn. If you clone in a C shape, you should be able to recreate the highlight without theburn. A bit of healing spot. and job done. I think.

Here's how it works, let me know what you think

[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/2.jpg[/IMG]

"the nasty comment"

Basically, you've gone on and on, for months now, making up excuses on why you were selling your best glass, involving many people in threads about your 'fake' (or meaningless to say the least) issues of focus on your pentax ds, and all, all of this, just to go and buy a friggin nikon.

Speachless, and feeling cheated for having read so many threads with interest, now realising that your intentions have been misleading from the beginning.

Regards,

Nathan

The Tamron 18-250 is an absolutely amazing lens. Its quite sharp, quite good at controlling CA and distortion. It is incredibly versatile, and very very useful for all sorts of applications.

I recently discovered another "galazy" of image quality by purchasing the 16-50mm f2.8, but in the "normal zoom's" galazy, the 18-250 is very very highly considered.

Hope this helps!

Nathan

Good Point Matt...(As usual I'd say ) Even if those 7 stops of maximum range in the RAW file should give you enough to build a noise free image. Or not? (as in, all my HDR's are build this way, and they are not noisy - although I realise that all the images that wanted to be processed and showed too much noise, have quickly reached the bin.)

Nimitz, sorry, what are you talking about? HDR means High Dynamic Range, and nowhere in the rulebook of HDR (The one that doesn't exist..) is there a point on how you achieve the different exposures.
My HDR workflow has been explained in another thread, so I don't understand what you mean by
"Well mainly because that is not a HDR image. Thats is just a tonemapped raw file. It can look very good, but will limit your results."

Good day to everybody!

Nathan

I've shown some of my hdr in the picture forum.

I honestly don't understand why you want to super-impose different shots when you can just shoot 1 correct exposure in RAW and then save 1-2-3-5 a million differently exposed (yet exactly the same image) images.
All this workflow only complicates things as you will always move the camera from one shot to the other. I will never rely on the camera's AV mode read of a scene over a different period of time.

Light changes, and as much as camera meters are very accurate, I will not rely on it to give me a 'fixed' measure of +/- 1 EV stop, never on different exposures! (So even if i was to shoot 5 different exposures, I'd either go for the bracket shot or simply do it in manual).
Still its easier to do it in RAW and on a nice computer screen. (ANyway HDR is such a strong manipulation that there are no excuses for NOT processing the image in RAW converter!!!!

Nice shot John, I think its too bright, and also too harsh of an HDR, but this is only my opinion. I love the foreground, and I think you should crop the top a bit, and maybe use a 1 stop lower exposure.

Cheers, Nathan

Like this one!

[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Tiger.jpg[/IMG]

The weird white areas are the almost removed bars that didn't allow the peaceful tiger to eat me!

Wellll to be completely honest, I like the original a lot... quite a bit more than the HDR.

It has amazing shadows, and colours....

But this is just my opinion

This forum is amazingly entertaining.

I haven't been here for long, but I feel that it is a normal aspect of modern society to respect the "elders". Be it the person who is older, or the one that has more posts, or the one that has actively participated more in the life of one particular 'society'.

Sarcasm, irony, little jokes against other people are only a stupid way of behaving. As John said "lets talk about photography" and not consider the fact that 'elders' have their own ways and words, and one might disagree, but still should respect.

Remember that we only know each other through little avatars, and written words; judging is un-necessary, and completely useless.

To conclude; whoever was criticizing George, let me tell you that aparts from the RARE harsh words, there is a whole lot to learn from him... so go on and have a proper photogaphy discussion!

Regards to all,

Nathan

I think that the allignment is absolutely perfect, spot on. Which means that at least that part of the HDR process is defnitely ok.

Now you might want to consider what are your intentions. I don't completely agree with the idea that an HDR has to be "extreme" because if it isn't its just not right. I quite like a moderate 'higher' dynamic range without overdoing it. But this is all up to you and your personal taste.

I think that this image is very very good, perhaps you might want to try and employ HDR in B&W photos because it gives a lot of creative range, without necessarily looking HDR crazy! In this specific case on my monitor it looks a bit over saturated, and I would probably like it more on the mono side. But the HDR effect is absolutely spot on.

Nathan