Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 21, 2008, 2:41 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,288
Default

Beautiful sunset Bahadir! Your hdr edit is very well done also, I agree with Alan in respects to some hdrs being over the top, this is not one of those. Personally I try to make photographs as accurate as possible to what my eyes saw. I think hdr is great until they come out with a camera that has more dynamic range. Here is my take on the non-hdr image.

Bob

Last edited by bhammitt; May 9, 2009 at 6:52 AM.
bhammitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 21, 2008, 4:56 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Calicajun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Quartz Hill, CA
Posts: 3,455
Default

bahadir wrote:
Quote:
Calicajun wrote:
Quote:
Nice work on the HDR, looks like it came right out of the camera. Well except for the Sun seems to have moved just a bit on you.
Thank you! Reading that the HDR looks like coming right out of the camera, I feel quite rewardedBtw,do you mean the sun looks a bit more nearer to the beholder than it is supposed to look?
No, I wasn't talking about now close the Sun looks to be, something I hadn't noticed until you pointed it out to me.I meant that the Sun looks a little elongated in the HDR as to the out of the camera single layer shoot. Then again it could just be me and my bad eyes.:?
Calicajun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 21, 2008, 9:43 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default

alex james wrote:
Quote:
If you want to print on glossy papers then go for the 1900. If you want to print on more artsy matte and watercolor papers then go with the 2400.

I have the 1800 and 2200. If you will ever want decent glossy prints then don't get the 2400, you will not be happy. For anything else, it's awesome. The 2200 has better shadow detail, I assume because of the light black.

I've had the 2200 for I guess 4 or more years and ran thousands of prints through it without an issue. I've never had a clogged head and have been told it's because of the high humidity down here.

I use the 2200 on luster papers some and still don't like the gloss differential so I spray them and that takes care of it, hence if you do a lot of luster and glossy prints , you will like the 1900 better. Hope this helps bahadir.
Thank you foryour valuablesuggestions, my friend! There arealso the 1400 and2400 I'm taking into account:?

.................................................. .................

@ Alan: Thanks for yourexclusive evaluation

Actually, I'm one of those who still carry a cut tip fountain penas the writing utensil:-)So, when it comes to make or not to make a HDR, I'd say: All in good time! For example, if I wanted a pictureenhanced bysilhouettes, I would rather rely onthe meteringon the camera..Oh, btw, I got an external HD of 320gb to keep the differently exposed variations ; )

.................................................. ...............

bhammit wrote:

Quote:
Beautiful sunset Bahadir! Your hdr edit is very well done also, I agree with Alan in respects to some hdrs being over the top, this is not one of those. Personally I try to make photographs as accurate as possible to what my eyes saw. I think hdr is great until they come out with a camera that has more dynamic range. Here is my take on the non-hdr image.
Dear Bob, I am happy to read your kind words of appreciation: )I'd also thank you fordisplaying your take as well as sharing your valuable remarks about the HDR in general.Actually, my only reason to upgrade my camera would be for a noticeably higher DR rather than more megapixels or an extendediso range:!:

.................................................. ........................

Calicajun wrote:
Quote:
bahadir wrote:
Quote:
Calicajun wrote:
Quote:
Nice work on the HDR, looks like it came right out of the camera. Well except for the Sun seems to have moved just a bit on you.
Thank you! Reading that the HDR looks like coming right out of the camera, I feel quite rewardedBtw,do you mean the sun looks a bit more nearer to the beholder than it is supposed to look?

No, I wasn't talking about now close the Sun looks to be, something I hadn't noticed until you pointed it out to me.I meant that the Sun looks a little elongated in the HDR as to the out of the camera single layer shoot. Then again it could just be me and my bad eyes.:?
Oh, not at all!! Your observatin is trueHowever a little negligable, here, IMO


bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2008, 7:23 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

Hi Bahadir,

Like many others have said, your HDR version is really spectacular here! Not too over the top in terms of trying that HDR effect. Because I also agree, what we want is a realistic and "as the eye sees" version.

The depth of colours and shades of oranges, blues, clouds, etc - all combine with a well thought out composition to make a fantastic outcome!!!

I think that Alex's 2nd edit is quite good. but for some reason I still love your 1st photo... though yes, maybe those squiggly lines are a bit distracting for me.

thanks for sharing this beauty

Paul
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2008, 5:44 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default

pj1974 wrote:
Quote:
Hi Bahadir,

Like many others have said, your HDR version is really spectacular here! Not too over the top in terms of trying that HDR effect. Because I also agree, what we want is a realistic and "as the eye sees" version.

The depth of colours and shades of oranges, blues, clouds, etc - all combine with a well thought out composition to make a fantastic outcome!!!

I think that Alex's 2nd edit is quite good. but for some reason I still love your 1st photo... though yes, maybe those squiggly lines are a bit distracting for me.

thanks for sharing this beauty

Paul
Thanks for letting me know your valued opinion, Paul! I know there's no fixed setting formula for a decent outcome,still, I tryto keep as natural as I canrather than trying to attainthe mostpunchy look whiledoing the tone mapping!...And each time the settings vary making the next attempt another trial and error attempt :?

Btw, you were one of those in this forum who induced me to go HDR with inspiring images: )
bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2008, 6:39 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
pj1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 2,914
Default

bahadir wrote
Quote:
Thanks for letting me know your valued opinion, Paul! I know there's no fixed setting formula for a decent outcome,still, I tryto keep as natural as I canrather than trying to attainthe mostpunchy look whiledoing the tone mapping!...And each time the settings vary making the next attempt another trial and error attempt :?

Btw, you were one of those in this forum who induced me to go HDR with inspiring images: )
Well I'm just part of this useful team of friends at Steve's forum! Indeed, I think several people state their opinion that using HDR is a good thing so long as it does not make the image less realistic.... A comparison. The best a good "loud speaker" system should attempt is to reproduce live music... as close as possible to the symphony orchestra, rock band, jazz musicians, etc.... The purpose of electronic music systems is NOT to: "have ground shattering bass or glass splitting treble", imho!

You have encouraged me to share a few more (hopefully good) HDR's! You have set the bar very high, dear B!!

Paul
pj1974 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:49 AM.