Got a Overexposed Photo? Turn it into HDR!

[Jan-Jasinski]

Hey guys,

As I am re-editing many shots from the past I noticed a few were really great but overexposed or backlit. My solution, turn them into HDR instead of posting a washed up photo. Try it yourself!

What are your guys thoughts?













Cheers



Jan

[Simpleboy]

This isnt HDR. It's just tone mapping (which on computers HDR is a subset of but i digress). All your information has come from a set of info contained within 5 stops, you've just altered where that information is displayed. You have no detail in the white spots or black spots due to the clipping of data from the exposure which is what HDR captures. Funnily enough, had you shot in RAW, the first two should have been easily salvagable and would have given you the best quality in the final edit from the principals of HAMSTTR.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Jan,
As it has been said this is NOT HDR. I'm at work now so I have to be quick but...

First 3 shots are still overexposed, if you upload them they'll get an "overproc" rejection as well.
last 3 shots were backlit and... they are still backlit.

Shooting jpeg, an overexposed shot is a lost cause, at least for JP database.
And like I told you the other day, first step (way before even suggesting learning HDR) is to learn how to use an histogram. If I had taken any of the first 3 shot, a quick look at the histogram on the camera and they would have been deleted right away.

Regards
Alex

[DAIRD]

Jan,

although its not HDR, I find its been a good idea of you doing something creative with your photos. I've been playing around with some of Photoshop items and this was one of my favorite tools, opening new aspects in changing the photos.

Greetings,

Ralf

[PMN]

What are your guys thoughts?

That it's a massively overused technique, generally used in an utterly tasteless way to attempt to hide flaws that shouldn't have been present in the first place (like overexposure).

Well you did ask!

I do kinda like the BA 777 though...

[DAIRD]

There goes an good idea....

[PMN]

There goes an good idea....

Hiding an overexposed photo under a mass of processing isn't a good idea though. Doing HDR properly and with good reason is fine but it really shouldn't be used to hide flaws.

[E-Diddy!]

Fail.

[Jan-Jasinski]

Jan,

although its not HDR, I find its been a good idea of you doing something creative with your photos. I've been playing around with some of Photoshop items and this was one of my favorite tools, opening new aspects in changing the photos.

Greetings,

Ralf

Thanks. I just really don't like plain shots sometimes but would like to share them especially if they're more of a rare shot.

That it's a massively overused technique, generally used in an utterly tasteless way to attempt to hide flaws that shouldn't have been present in the first place (like overexposure).

Well you did ask!

I do kinda like the BA 777 though...

Yes this thread is complete shite, spam by me... Those "HDR's" which are actually just tone mapped are not very good indeed.

Hiding an overexposed photo under a mass of processing isn't a good idea though. Doing HDR properly and with good reason is fine but it really shouldn't be used to hide flaws.

Yes, HDR's are too fake but sometimes they can look nice such as this one which was just slightly given a nice touch of tone mapping:

Untitled | Gulfstream Aerospace G200 | N878DN | CYOW by Jan Jasinski, on Flickr

Fail.

Yeah I agree lol...

[PMN]

Yes, HDR's are too fake

It depends how they're used. The idea behind HDR came about long before the advent of digital - it came about back in the 1850's in fact so there's nothing inherently fake about the technique itself, it's just massively overused and misused. I have nothing against HDR when used well but I think it looks utterly shit when used for the sake of it without purpose. And I still absolutely don't think it should be used to hide flaws in a photo. If you screw a shot up then go back and keep retaking it until you don't screw it up anymore, it's as simple as that. Don't bury it under a load of processing and try bullshit people into believing it's 'artistic'.

I'm not saying that's what you've done here by the way, Jan, but that's exactly what many people do with HDR!

[E-Diddy!]

In a nutshell, Cameras take HDRs, computers don't. If the photo is a dud coming out of the camera, then throwing it through HDR will not make it any less of (and will probably make it more of) a dud.