you do hate this...right? ... why, in several short sentences :-)

jimgalli · Dec 18, 2019

So, then, who's at fault? All the drug cartel lord's in Mexico, or the addicts with all their money here? The reason it IS; is because there's a demand. All the Walmart people in fly-over country demand it. Love it. So . . . it is. Not so different from Disney animation really.

removed account4 · Dec 18, 2019

dmr said:
This!

In my not so humble opinion, most HDR photos that I see posted are overdone, if not poorly done. There are a few, however, that use HDR effectively, and with those, it's not obvious at first glance that they are HDR shots.

couldn't agree more !
its like burning / dodging, lith prints, wet plate, high contrast work and just about anything
there is a lot of it, and some of it is good and some of it not as good...

DREW WILEY said:
Everybody with five cents worth of brains in their heads routinely masked Ciba prints. It went out of production for entirely different reasons. But when it comes to HDR, five cents of brains seems darn hard to come by. Think of monkeys getting ahold of finger paint. No reserve. I totally agree with the foregoing post.

maybe
i think people who are good at things do them well
and there are a lot of people who want to do things well but the learning curve is steep
so they don't do them as well, this is with all types of photography ( and everything else ).
imean there are a ton of people who
shoot f64 type grand landscapes or 8x10 landscapes in color or black and white some do it well, some not so well,
and some love velivia and highlysaturated work and know what they are doing and others stuff looks kind of garish, same with pictorialist images, uber sharp clincal digital, and everything in-between.
besides, it's the HOBBYISTS ( people who spend their disposable income on photography stuff ) are who drive the market for all these things ( from digital programs to 10,000$ lf lenses ) some are good and some aspire to be good. and does it really matter ? NOPE cause they are having a good time.
i've said it 10,000 times on this website, its too bad people get a boat load of bad vibes thrown at them
because they are having a good time, and they happen to be at one or the other end of the "purity of photography specturm"

eddie · Dec 18, 2019

Looking down on someone because they use HDR is no different than looking down on someone using a Holga, or 35mm, or film. How a person chooses to express their creativity matters less than their ability to get where they want to go. If the tools they choose help get them there, those tools have value.

kevs · Dec 19, 2019

Meh. It's nothing I couldn't do in GIMP by adjusting levels, boosting saturation and blending layers. HDR is not my bag but it's just a tool and a faddy one at that, like tobacco-graduated filters. There's enough room in this world for it to co-exist alongside film. I gave up hating trivial things a long time ago.

jtk · Dec 19, 2019

DREW WILEY said:
I guess if one enjoys gilding the lily with fools' gold, somebody will take their money yet another nonsensical toy.

Right ! In your good old days nobody painted with store-bought oils, they ground their own pigments into animal fat.

jim10219 · Dec 19, 2019

Well, it's kind of bad timing. I mean, HDR is on the outs. What's popular in photography right now is low saturation images.

But the way I see it is it's all just tools. Some images look best in B&W. Some look best in color. Some look best in low saturation. Some look best in HDR. I try not to come into editing a photograph with an aesthetic in mind, and let the image tell me what it wants. So any technique is equally valid, and the only bad technique is one that doesn't serve the message of the image. I know that's not the popular thing to do. The popular thing is to define a style, and run that into the ground to make a name for yourself. But popularity has never been my forte, nor concern.

I agree that this doesn't offer me anything that I can't already do myself. I guess it makes things easier for some people though, and that's worth something. But I don't have any strong feelings towards this software, or HDR photographs in general. If there's something that I hate, it's the commoditization of opinions. Opinions aren't supposed to be valuable. That's what facts are for. And when we start valuing the opinions of others, we devalue the weight of facts. And then lesser minds can't tell the difference. Suddenly this is good and that is bad, instead of this is something I like, and that is something I don't.

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 19, 2019

jimgalli said:
So, then, who's at fault? All the drug cartel lord's in Mexico, or the addicts with all their money here? The reason it IS; is because there's a demand. All the Walmart people in fly-over country demand it. Love it. So . . . it is. Not so different from Disney animation really.

I agree. The "issue" is demand. There's the American demand for drugs that made the drug lords in Mexico. With Disney, digital cameras, vaping devices and HDR, it's all created to fill a demand.

Vaughn · Dec 19, 2019

Mainecoonmaniac said:
I agree. The "issue" is demand. There's the American demand for drugs that made the drug lords in Mexico. With Disney, digital cameras, vaping devices and HDR, it's all created to fill a demand.

And our capitalist society is set up to create and increase demand. It thrives on and requires growth and the increase in our 'demands'.

DREW WILEY · Dec 19, 2019

I'm on the verge of cancelling my Natl Geo magazine subscription. Their photos were always for sake of the story, and did that job well, even though awfully predictable at times. But now that they've decided to get artsy and print on dull paper, with images so flat and conspicuously HDR'd that they taste like PeptoBismol in lukewarm water, and have starting showing every kind of silly gotcha tweak that had already became monotonous thirty years ago in so-called "fine arts" venues - and a thousand times more pretentious now that there's an automized app for every corny thing conceivable - well, you get the point. Techie engineers have to keep coming up with this nonsense to keep their jobs, and camera manufacturers have to come out with the newest and coolest every few months just so consumers can trample on each other during Black Plague Friday. I remember the CEO of one of those tech companies walking up to me atop a ridge trail with his grandchildren when I had my 8x10 set up nearby. Very nice man, who asked if he could put his grandson on his shoulders to look under my darkcloth, so that he could see what a REAL camera is - his words, not mine.

Pioneer · Dec 19, 2019

Why should I hate it?

Just because I don't use it doesn't mean others shouldn't work with it. My granddaughter has become pretty good with the method.

I'm not always successful (RAP is an example) but I try not to let my own preferences get in the way of new and different methods.

On the flip side you must agree that walking around with Barnack Leica equipped with an old, uncoated Elmar is also a bit odd in today's world. Probably considerably more odd than using HDR. I would hope that others don't hold it against me.

Kodachromeguy · Dec 19, 2019

DREW WILEY said:
a ridge trail with his grandchildren when I had my 8x10 set up nearby. Very nice man, who asked if he could put his grandson on his shoulders to look under my darkcloth, so that he could see what a REAL camera is - his words, not mine.

How funny. In just the last week, I heard a similar comment twice when I was taking some pictures in an old ice factory with my Hasselblad. I was even using the "obsolete" Panatomic-X.

DREW WILEY · Dec 19, 2019

We have hundreds of miles of trails around here. Some are very quiet and nice for solitude, while others are adjacent to major tech hubs, and you frequently run into electronics engineers etc. Hey, these are the guys that sweat and groan 70 hrs a week designing all these electronic apps and gadgets to begin with. Quite a few make their living in digital imaging. So the last thing they want to do on their spare time is more of the same! They hit the trails, walking or cycling, then stop and look at my camera, of whatever type I'm using that day, and then ask what it takes to have their own darkroom. Sadly, a six figure income isn't enough around here to rent a rusty camper shell with only the roof dry at high tide, let alone have the luxury of a darkroom. I'm old enough to have bought my property over 45 yrs ago, when it was a different story.

awty · Dec 19, 2019

DREW WILEY said:
I'm on the verge of cancelling my Natl Geo magazine subscription. Their photos were always for sake of the story, and did that job well, even though awfully predictable

Actually in comparison to some 35 year old publications I have there isnt a great deal of difference in paper and photography styles if anything the photo editing is much better and more subtle to the ones in the opening post. Guess they have to keep up with the times. Wish they would keep up with the times in the editorial dept, who still uses grandad measurements? Actually my father who is nearly 90 uses metric.

DREW WILEY · Dec 19, 2019

Well, I never expected them to be an art magazine; but they always claimed journalistic objectivity and integrity in their photos. Now digital trickeries abound. Yeah, the inclusion of amateur fun things at the start of the magazine might be appropriately tailored to a younger audience, and their own kind of technology; but it's drifted over the line, journalistically.
I'm just not fond of gimmicks in general, I guess.

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 19, 2019

Vaughn said:
And our capitalist society is set up to create and increase demand. It thrives on and requires growth and the increase in our 'demands'.

Yes. In the process in increasing demand, modern media with it’s ads and social media influencers. It makes us in constant want despite wealth, it makes us feel inadequate and ugly chasing the ghost of satisfaction described by pop culture.

awty · Dec 19, 2019

DREW WILEY said:
Well, I never expected them to be an art magazine; but they always claimed journalistic objectivity and integrity in their photos. Now digital trickeries abound. Yeah, the inclusion of amateur fun things at the start of the magazine might be appropriately tailored to a younger audience, and their own kind of technology; but it's drifted over the line, journalistically.
I'm just not fond of gimmicks in general, I guess.

Think most print media is struggling, young people for most part aren't interested in physical magazines or newspapers. NG will have to invest heavily in multi media and gimmicks if they are to stay afloat.
The only reason I have the latest copy is that was gifted to me by someone older.
Good unbiased journalism is becoming scarily scarce these days.

DREW WILEY · Dec 19, 2019

They are a multimedia organization, including their own TV channel with a lot of trashy filler content, and once in awhile something worthwhile. I don't subscribe to cable TV. But for such a toot their own horn outfit, their photo editorship is pretty far behind the curve. Just maybe they want a lot of flat images because they're easier to reproduce. I dunno. Reminds me of soggy pancakes and watered-down coffee.

jtk · Dec 20, 2019

jim10219 said:
Well, it's kind of bad timing. I mean, HDR is on the outs. What's popular in photography right now is low saturation images.

I have no idea what's "popular". That's entirely a matter of where you look.

Unfortunately many of"us" seem to think photos are "supposed to look" the way postcards, minilabs and grandfather Kodak dictated (i.e. mass popular taste).

As well, "HDR" isn't a "look" except to people who have axes to grind. It's an easy and very flexible tool. Use of GIMP tool narrows possibilities and wastes wastes time vs PS.

jtk · Dec 20, 2019

[QUOTE="awty, post: 2236504, member: 80061"
Good unbiased journalism is becoming scarily scarce these days.[/QUOTE]

Journalism entails reporters, editors, and publishers ...being human they have always had personal "bias."

The notion of "good unbiased journalism" is inherently political/marketing, People who actually care about topics (such as photo, cooking, or anything else) access multiple sources. IMO the best photo journalism is found in New York Times (which has multiple angles on topics and imagery), never was NG.

DREW WILEY · Dec 20, 2019

Oh, I expect some kind of bias. NG has always had a particular flavor, depending on which Editor was on the throne. But nowadays it more and more seems to echo all the same political themes as news networks. Nothing wrong with that; but it hardly makes for a relaxing read. I just find it redundant. The liberties taken with photocomps etc don't help. If they want credibility they should stay away from all of that. They properly annotate digi fun stuff; but I think it's a misfit to their proclaimed mission. I always did hate postcardy stuff; but that's a different story - the dumbing down of natural beauty to the lowest common denominator, turning it into a mere commercial commodity, gilding the lily, etc., which PS has facilitated on an industrial scale; couch potato outdoorsmen.

awty · Dec 20, 2019

jtk said:
[QUOTE="awty, post: 2236504, member: 80061"
Good unbiased journalism is becoming scarily scarce these days.

Journalism entails reporters, editors, and publishers ...being human they have always had personal "bias."

The notion of "good unbiased journalism" is inherently political/marketing, People who actually care about topics (such as photo, cooking, or anything else) access multiple sources. IMO the best photo journalism is found in New York Times (which has multiple angles on topics and imagery), never was NG.[/QUOTE]
Yes I agree, but some are less bias than others and the bias swing has become more one way than another. Getting well rounded investigative journalism is far more difficult than it use to be here. Most main stream news media here is geared towards grumpy old conservative men, because there the only ones that still buy it. Our national flag ship news paper The Australian has become the worst at that, you are lucky to still have the NYT. Young people have become more disenfranchised, I grew up watching the news on tv, use to buy newspapers every morning from about 16 and always listen to news radio, generally you could find the middle ground on what was really happening. Now its becoming more harder to work out what is really happening in the world. Would be a rarity to find someone under 30 engaging in the news, beyond the obligatory 2 minute radio news bulletin. My son use to spend a lot of time watching you tube bloggers, a lot of which was politically very conservative Americans, we would have some lively discussions. Since then he has fallen in love with a girl from Hong Kong and has softened his stance considerably and doesn't engage in politics any more, reality sets in. My other children have zero interest in the news and what they know is ill informed, from ill informed bias sources (in the land of the blind a one eyed man will be king) Copies of NG sit in the toilet library, something to browse over while having bowel movement.
BTW when I say tv news Im talking about the free to air national broadcaster (ABC, like BBC) and SBS world news.

you do hate this...right? ... why, in several short sentences :-)

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency