HDR - A lot of Questions, Fewer Answers

Published by Nick Ladd | Filed under Shooting, Digital Darkroom

Okay, I’ll admit it; prior to literally stumbling across a large Flickr group of HDR devotees I wasn’t even aware of HDR (High Dynamic Range) imaging techniques using standard digital cameras. I’ve always been aware of the limited ranges (compared to what our eyes can see) that can be captured and displayed using traditional methods (film of different varieties, digital camera, monitors, paper, etc.) but never really thought about the possibility of creating these types of images. Maybe I’ve been living in a bit of a photographic darkroom for too long, but somehow I missed out on this trend.

I’m not going to try to explain HDR imaging in this post, nor am I going to try explaining techniques and processes of producing HDR photos. I’m not an HDR technical wizard, and these things have already been discussed and blogged about ad nauseam. Start with this Wiki Article, and then do some Googling…this is what I did, and got me caught up to speed pretty quickly.

At first glance the HDR Flickr Group literally amazed me. The vibrancy of colors, range of shade and highlights, and just plain ‘neatness’ of the imagery immediately piqued my interest. At the same time however, many of the images appeared to me, downright comical; akin to imagery produced when someone first gets a hold of Photoshop and starts running their photos through every filter known to man. From there, my mind wandered into the HDR abyss and started to pose some questions about the appropriate uses of HDR and its place within photography in general. Below you will find these questions as well as my personal ideas about the topic.

Is HDR art, or just a cheap trick?

Talk about a loaded question Photomatrix and the inclusion of HDR capabilities in Photoshop have opened up to the general public the capability to with relative ease create HDR images. Access to such tools is an amazing thing that should inspire creativity in those who previously might not have gone down that avenue. Along with this, comes the HDR vomit that I see posted in about 70% of the images on Flickr. To me (warning, opinion ahead) art in all things requires a vision with intent. HDR is not the art, but simply a tool, much like the camera, to produce an artist’s vision. The majority of images posted online tend to be ‘happy accidents’ the result of bringing an image into Photomatrix, tweaking the sliders to the extreme, and producing something that resembles a Woodstockian acid trip. To me, HDR has it’s place, but only when it is used at an art piece’s conception as a tool to achieve a particular vision…leading us to…

When if HDR appropriate?

It amazes me that a large number of scenes that have been HDR’d did not originally contain the dynamic range within the frame that HDR was intended to capture. When this takes place, it is simply a tool to stylize a photograph. Personally, this is not my cup of tea, but if this was the vision and intent of the artist, I can see it’s appropriate use especially if your not try to create a record of a place, but instead an impressionistic representation of it.

The true power of HDR lies in its subtle capabilities. I see HDR as being akin to a split NG filter. HDR can help you bring out detail in your highlights and shadows. That being said, this is not always necessary or desired. I have seen a large number of images that look rather flat because everything in the image has perfect exposure…what is the fun in that, and more importantly, where is the depth in that?

HDR abuse seems to be a mantra on Flickr. I would advise to avoid this…no matter how much ‘interestingness’ it gives your images.

Are these even HDR?

No. No, and no. All of the images you see online are 8 bit derivatives of an original HDR image. There are no consumer pieces of equipment (that I know of) to display electronically or in print HDR images. What you see online are tone mapped approximations of HDR images dummied down to be viewed. The process of tone mapping is where some HDR images seem to cross the line.

What obligations do photographers have to disclose their HDR work?

A truly great HDR image, like good post-processing, should be transparent. A beautiful image is a beautiful image, and I don’t see any reason to go out of your way to say it is HDR unless it is for educational purposes or specifically asked.

Where does HDR have its applications?

As I walked home through the streets of Seattle yesterday passing the endless number of condo towers going up it struck me that hyper-realistic and even surreal images of these buildings could easily make wonderful marketing materials. These places are not necessarily selling a reality, but more of an idealized lifestyle. HDR’s too-good-too-be-true images could help sell this. I’m very curious to see if there has been a niche established for commercial photographers doing this type of work. I could see this being used extensively in all types of marketing photography. Whether this is ethically acceptable is another question.

Conclusions

What is art? This philosophical black hole has been asked since the beginning of time and has an infinite number of deeply personal answers. As new technologies are invented and the art world reacts there will be those who embrace these new techniques and those that turn their nose at them. HDR is no different.

Hopefully in the near future I will start toying around with HDR on my own and try to get some good results. In the mean time, I’d love to hear from my readers what they think of HDR, it’s appropriate uses, and maybe even some of their own images.