Isn't the zone system a form of HDR?
Isn't the zone system a form of HDR?
No. They're actually opposites. Zone System is used to make an image better. HDR is used to make an image worse.
I think it's self explanatory. The use of the ZS is to alter tonal values to improve an image. 99% of the HDR images I've seen use the technique because it exists. I can't think of a single over-manipulated HDR image I've ever seen, which wouldn't have been better left alone.
If HDR is used correctly it is used to do exactly the same thing, improve the tonal/colour range of the image.
If that's the case, it's rarely used correctly.
I don't mix photography and computers. And photos shot with digital cameras bore me. There's no intrinsic value in it; no investment. For the better or worse of it, a film picture requires an investment in the raw materials, and a risk that it might not turn out perfectly as conceived. But in the end, it is what it is. The digital photographer could simply delete it from the screen on the back of the camera and shoot another, because there is no monetary value in it; nothing to risk or lose. Fishing in a barrel or shooting deer from a stand overlooking a corn pile is not hunting.
I don't mix photography and computers.
My original understanding of HDR was to expand exposure latitude (Zone System).
The OP's observation of the pencil sketch gritty look is called "HDR", but not what I consider the original intent.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?