HDR Sunset.

[ebiggs1]

The 1st photo is under exposed. The 2nd one is normal and the 3rd one is over exposed. This increases the DR (dynamic range) of the digital sensor by several stops or EV's (exposure value). The last shot is the stacked image from Lightroom.

[RobertTheFat]

I assume your point is that too much fiddling is counterproductive. To me, the stacked image has a garish, artificial quality and lacks redeeming artistic value. I've shot a lot of sunsets, and IMO the second (correctly exposed) image is the only one worth saving.

[ebiggs1]

B from B,

I am glad you are not the one buying the prints then.    I guess I can put you down as a, no?

[ebiggs1]

Last night...even caught some birds in this one.  

[ebiggs1]

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Last night...even caught some birds in this one.  

---

More water, less sky.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

---

Ditto. But this one was arguably worth the effort.

[ebiggs1]

B from B,

"More water, less sky."

It isn't/wasn't a photo of the water.  It is all about the sky!   

I am afraid I am never going to drag you into the world of HDR.  Although you have looked at it and didn't realize it.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

B from B,

"More water, less sky."

It isn't/wasn't a photo of the water.  It is all about the sky!   

I am afraid I am never going to drag you into the world of HDR.  Although you have looked at it and didn't realize it.

---

But that's the whole point of HDR. If it's done really well, you don't realize it. Or at least you don't notice it right away.

[kvbarkley]

Exactly, RTF.

I took an uninteresting picture of my (backlit) dog looking out the window. Once with standard evaluative exposure and once with the T6S internal HDR. The only difference between the two was that the standard picture had blown highlights in the window, and the HDR showed blue sky.

The HDR image was much more like I saw the scene, but I am so used to blown highlights in an image like that,  it did not even register as unnatural.