I just wish the industry would pay more attention. It is like the Megapixels vs true image quality issue in photography!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I just wish the industry would pay more attention. It is like the Megapixels vs true image quality issue in photography!
Oh my god yes. The general population doesn't understand Megapixels don't equal better pictures. I don't know how many times I'd be talking to a client and they just ask me: "So how many megapixels does your camera have?" I had use a lot of willpower to not facepalm right there in front of them. I wish camera bodies would focus a lot more on improving dynamic range until it hits at least 24+ stops.
So true! In fact dynamic range is the thing that I would love to have - I often find myself having to underexpose shots to make up for it! HDR just always looks fake. I have been told that Medium Format cameras give you more but they are so expensive that I doubt I will ever be able to try one - plus I would rather downsize than go up in size.
I agree, HDR usually looks fake, but sometimes it's a necessary evil. :( I usually only HDR if dynamic range in the shot exceeds the dynamic range of the camera, and then I try to tune the output to look more natural if possible. Although, I'll be honest sometimes my HDR doesn't succeed in looking as real as I would like. Here's one HDR I'm proud of though: https://www.facebook.com/A.Furmanczyk.Photography/photos/a.497540865676.269323.33771525676/10150298063105677/?type=3&theater
That's how it should be done as it doesn't look overdone! I think if an HDR looks like an HDR then it has gone too far.
Thanks man. ^_^ Yes, you're right, HDR is a powerful tool that must be used responsibly. When it's overdone, it's ugly as fuck.
Definitely.