Fighter HDR Photos

[Andras]

Cool, very nice, and i think that they look more like perfectly exposed images than the "actual" HDR photos you normally see. It's very subtile HDR... Wall stuff!

With all due respect, I only think your border sux, its too big and loud, and it degrades your pics. If i shot that many cool shots i'd design a super subtile border or no border at all, but only a logo. Just my thoughts

[dinovandoorn]

some more HDR stuff with a reduced border

[dinovandoorn]

[Spacecake]

[Andras]

some more HDR stuff with a reduced border

Excellent and your next post as well..! You have got it nailed my friend!

Still, your border sux, but that's just me.. (A grey watermark logo IMAP globe only, no border frame, that would be cool)

I used to experiment with borders as well. Bordermaker and stuff.. Now i know: No border, only a logo, watermarked (or not) is cool. I'm still thinking of a logo

Check Crizz or Kleintje Pils, that's what i mean.. But hey, it's personal right

[Andras]

[two pics]

Hi Spacecake,

1st one: Doesn't do me anything.

2nd one: Nice HDR effect, maybe a bit too good of an HDR, i seem to like the ones that are almost not recognizable but have an excellent lighting all over... Your first try right?

[dinovandoorn]

some jasdf stuff with some extra dynamic contrast

[Andras]

Hey Dino, these look very normal to me, no HDR? They look great!...

[dinovandoorn]

they sure are HDR....

[pjotrtje]

Looking at most of the pics in the various HDR threads: HDR gives a nice arty-farty effect. However, Dino's last contribution shows the real difference: HDR seems to introduce effects that weren't there in the first place. I honestly like the original better!
(HDR was originally meant to be used for long term exposures with different aperture settings (to ensure maximum contrast and quality in the end result), not for multiple 'interpretations' of the same 'negative'.)

[Andras]

Looking at most of the pics in the various HDR threads: HDR gives a nice arty-farty effect. However, Dino's last contribution shows the real difference: HDR seems to introduce effects that weren't there in the first place. I honestly like the original better!
(HDR was originally meant to be used for long term exposures with different aperture settings (to ensure maximum contrast and quality in the end result), not for multiple 'interpretations' of the same 'negative'.)

You are certainly right there pjotrtje, but that is just the effect off this changing picture, if you check the grass in the previous one, you don't see the spots, same goes for the noise on the nose. I think you have found the ultimate way of post processing Dino, as far as i'm concerned!.. Excellent..!