Let's talk bout HDR!

Yes, let's talk about HDR! Since this technique has emerged (link explaining this technique), it look like it's the only way to obtain stunning images or acceptable photographs. At least, that's what I see on photographic forums I often visit. When I see such stuff, theres always a common mistake, which is the goal why they've used HDR rather than any other technique. A lot of photographers use HDR because they think it's "cool" and not ordinary. Personally, I deplore such usage since theres no goal behind. Let me explain: I don't see HDR as a technique to use because it's "cool", I see it as a technique to use to acheive a goal or to obtain a specific result. Heres an example : you want to take a picture of your living room, but it has windows which leads to a garden outside and the sun is hitting hard. Of course, the gap between highlights and shadows is such, our camera wouldn't be able to get details everywhere. Suddenly, an idea hits you : why not do some Bracketing and then use a program such as Photomatix to create an HDR image. Et voila, it's done, you have details everywhere. As I've shown in this example, this is probably the way you would've used, since it's a fast and effective technique. In such case, I agree the use of HDR, because the goal was to obtain a good exposition to be able to see the garden's dwarf and a pic of you as a baby on the wall. You can see here the difference between using HDR for a goal and using it for fun. However, even if my goal was to get details everywhere, I wouldn't use the final version of the HDR. Instead, I would've used the best exposition showing details inside, then use the HDR image to get parts and paste them where it was over-exposed on the original image, playing with the opacity of the layer. I would do so because HDR is looking to do one thing : bring the image to a middle gray, giving a dull and mono-tone look in my view. I have here and example to show the difference between an HDR image and the technique I use (lets call it local collage). I took this photo as part of a contract for a private customer. I did some bracketing especially for this scene since the sun is at counter-day (I don't know the term in English, if someone knows, please tell me!) (click to enlarge) As you can see, when the sky is well exposed, the car is under exposed and vice-versa. The next image shows a comparison between the final result I've sent to the customer and a HDR of the same image (Photomatix logo is pasted automatically on the pic since I have the trial version) (click to enlarge) Can you see the difference? HDR adds a mono-tone look and unwanted effects such as a burned sky and shiny/too much detailed trees, whereas "local collage" keeps the interesting contrast of such scene. These details make me prefer "local collage" to HDR. Sure, I admit HDR works well with some images and results can be amazing, but often the result is (to me) disappointing or meaningless. It doesn't mean I'll never use this technique, but I will think twice before doing so. Be your own judge next time you do HDR images! In between, I'll stay with my neutral gray graduated filters! Some may say it's old and un-cool, but you can't say it's not useful! A future subject to my blog! (some part of the text were translated from my original french text with google, so please be kind :) If you find any mistakes feel free to let me know!)