Are Cameras With Built-in HDR the Future of Photography?

Are Cameras With Built-in HDR the Future of Photography?

This entry is part 8 of 10 in the HDR Photography Session
« PreviousNext »

High Dynamic Range photography is one of two things: something that will be as commonplace as a built-in flash in ten years, or a silly fad that will soon die and fade away. One interesting facet of this debate is that camera manufacturers are beginning to embrace HDR so much that they’re actually building it straight into cameras as a way to get more detail out of your images.

Today we’ll go over what both what HDR is and what it isn’t. You’ll learn the difference between the core technology and the popular resulting effect that perhaps takes it too far. We’ll also take a look at the camera market to see which manufacturers are fully embracing in-camera HDR and which ones are hesitantly testing the waters.


Your Camera Vs. Your Face

HDR Cameras Future

Have you ever wondered why you can’t really shoot what you see? No matter what camera you have, from a cheap cell phone to a 5D, the images that are produced are notably different than what you’re perceiving in the real world.

There are several reasons for this: the fact that you have two eyes and one camera lens, different focusing mechanisms, etc. One of the most limiting of these factors is dynamic range, which, loosely defined, refers to the scope of lighting conditions in which we are able to perceive the world around us.

Your eyes have a much higher dynamic range than most or all commercial electronic sensors. The best of these sensors have dynamic ranges of about 13.5 stops of light, while human eyes are closer to 18-24 stops.

What this technical babble means on a practical level is that you possess the amazing ability to see well on a dark night, a bright sunny day and everything in between. In other words, your “range” of perception is quite broad.

Your camera, by contrast, isn’t quite so gifted. As you well know, it struggles with both shadows and highlights. If you set the exposure settings so that the details in a dark room are clearly shown, any points of light present in the image will be completely blown out.

Similarly, if you adjust your exposure for a sunny day, most or all of the detail present in a shadow will be completely lost. Digital photography is a constant game of juggling tradeoffs and it’s literally impossible with the current consumer-grade technology to capture the full range of detail that you see before you with a single image.


How HDR Works

So why use a single image? This was the heart of the question posed by the pioneers behind HDR imaging. The idea is actually extremely simple. By combining images taken at different exposures, you can meet or even surpass the range seen by the human eye. This is where bracketing comes in.

Bracketing involves setting your exposure down a given number of stops, taking a photo, then upping the exposure and snapping another shot of the same scene. This process is repeated until the photographer is satisfied with the range captured. It’s fairly typical for a photographer to use a three image system: one shot underexposed, one shot properly exposed and one shot overexposed.

Odds are, your DSLR already has this feature built into it in an automated fashion. This means all you have to do is click a single button, after which several photos are taken automatically at different exposures.

HDR Cameras Future

After this, the images are transferred to a computer where they are compiled into a single end product. By utilizing multiple images taken at multiple exposures, you’re able to create one final image containing all of the image detail from all of the photos. The end goal here is of course capturing a striking image that is much closer or even better than what you personally see.

The benefits here are clear but there are limitations and hurdles as well. The most significant of these is the fact that not everything you photograph will stay perfectly still as you take three to five different photos!

Addressing this problem is something that many applications like Photoshop and others are currently tackling and improving all the time, but there’s still plenty of progress to be made.


The HDR Taboo

HDR is a touchy subject. Many photographers absolutely hate the entire idea of HDR for several reasons. First of all, it admittedly feels a bit like cheating. However, there will always be purists who make this claim regarding any new photographic technological advancement.

Film fans descried the end of the art of photography when digital came along, digital post-processing of any kind (Photoshop, Lightroom, etc.) was and still continues to be something that is scorned by those that prefer to brag about the superiority of straight-from-camera shots.

HDR is simply another step on the same staircase. Technological geniuses will continue to invent amazing tools for photographers and we’ll continually reject them until the fad of doing so wears off and the benefits are too enticing to pass up.

A slightly more legitimate critique in my mind is the HDR craze that has resulted in endless roundups of photographs that look like something you might see on an acid trip at Disneyland.

HDR Cameras Future

Some people love this particular style of photography, others abhor it. Regardless of where you fall, you have to admit that this is simply a niche within the greater HDR field and not a legitimate reason to reject the entirety of HDR as a useful technology.

This would be similar to rejecting the incredibly useful RAW image file format because certain people use RAW Lightroom presets that you don’t like!


Built-In HDR: The Next Step

HDR Cameras Future

HDR is a fascinating technology to me because it represents a clever software-driven way to get better photos out of hardware that is otherwise much more limited. Simply put, who wouldn’t want the option of more detail in their photos?

However, on a practical level, there’s no way I’m ever going to manually combine exposures for every photograph I take in a shoot. My current post-processing procedure is quite lengthy as is and I have no intention of tripling it. And I think a lot of photographers are with me on this. This puts HDR technology more in the realm of an occasional fun experiment than something used by most photographers in every day work.

The only way I see HDR ever breaking out into widespread use by just about every photographer is automation. It has to be something that doesn’t add significant amounts of time to our current workflows.

One of the best possible scenarios for this is to have HDR as something that our cameras do for us behind the scenes as a feature that can be easily switched on and off, just like flash or auto-focus. This way it becomes just another pre-shot setting that I have the option to play with. We photographers hate extra work but we love extra buttons!

If you think automatic HDR inside a camera is a pipe dream, think again. Currently, one of the world’s most popular, ever-present pocket-sized cameras has this very feature: the iPhone.

Apple’s touchscreen wonder phone has a simple HDR on/off switch which causes the camera to take multiple shots and combine them in seconds with zero effort on your part. If a tiny cell phone can do it, why not a big, powerful DSLR?


Cameras with Built-In HDR Functions

Armed with the knowledge that the technology does in fact exist, we had a look around to see what camera manufacturers are doing about it. It turns out that there are indeed a number of cameras on the market today that possess built-in HDR functionality!

Though many of these are small and cheap, some of them are serious professional cameras with specs that will blow you away. Let’s take a look around too see who is doing in-camera HDR and how.

Pentax K-5

HDR Cameras Future

Amazon Price: $1,599.95

Surprisingly enough, Pentax seems to be one of the camera companies really at the forefront of this wave. Not only do they have several cameras with built-in HDR, it seems like it’s quickly becoming a standard feature.

The Pentax K-5 shown above boasts some really impressive specs, including 16.3MP an impressive ISO range of 80-51200, and full 1080p HD video at 25fps. This model features an upgraded HDR system designed to be used without a tripod. You just flip on HDR, point and shoot.

The camera does everything else and what you get is a JPG image (no HDR RAW option) with an impressive range of highlights and shadows. Check out a complete breakdown and review of the Pentax HDR system here.

Pentax 645D

HDR Cameras Future

Amazon Price: $19,995.95

Not sure that cutesy HDR features will ever make it into serious high-end professional cameras? Think again. Pentax is pushing HDR all across the board and the whopping $10,000 645D is no exception.

This beast boasts 40MP and ultra-high resolution images at 7264×5440. It’s interesting that Pentax saw HDR as an important enough feature to place in here, but left out the video capability present on many of their other SLRs. Someone is certainly putting a high priority on this technology!

Sony a550

HDR Cameras Future

Amazon Price: $599.95

Sony is another camera manufacturer jumping on the HDR bandwagon. A few of their cameras, like the a550 shown above, now have an on-board HDR system. It’s important to note that the a550 pulls detail from only two photographs while the Pentax system uses three. However, this is a much more affordable camera.

Also, Sony has another system called the “D-Range Optimizer” that isn’t true HDR, but does attempt to optimize a photo’s dynamic range. D-Range Optimizer is designed to work with moving subjects and therefore fills in where HDR falls short.

Canon Powershot G12

HDR Cameras Future

Amazon Price: $414.95

Canon hasn’t fully embraced in-camera HDR technology to the extent that the some of the other manufacturers have. One of the few places you can find it in the Canon line is on the Powershot G12, which is obviously more of a point and shoot consumer camera.

However, this does indicate that Canon is indeed working on the technology. And it’s not unheard of for them to figure something out on low end models and then bring it up to the big cameras like they did with video capability.

Furthermore, many tech blogs recently shot up a red flag when Canon filed a very interesting patent relating to HDR. It seems they might be trying to change the game completely before they get into it! Canon’s patent outlines a system whereby the camera alters exposure on a per-pixel level. Sound too crazy to be real? Check out more here.

Nikon Coolpix P100

HDR Cameras Future

Amazon Price: $399.95

Nikon seems to be taking the same road as Canon by tipping their toes into the HDR water and waiting to see how it pans out before taking the dive. Again we see this manifesting through introduction of a special HDR system in a low end camera: the Coolpix P100.

It is interesting to note however that higher end Nikon DSRLs have a special mode for combining multiple exposures. Though it’s not necessarily the intended purpose, photographers are increasingly starting to use this feature to create HDR images.

Casio EX-ZR100

HDR Cameras Future

Casio Price: $299.99

Casio is gradually introducing in-camera HDR features across their Exilim series of products. It definitely makes sense that cheaper cameras are embracing HDR technology first (iPhone, Coolpix, Casio, etc.). Many of these products simply don’t have the expensive hardware necessary to create professional quality images and HDR provides an easy way to boost the quality without changing the hardware and adding production costs.

Casio is actually embracing this technology on multiple levels. Like the other cameras that we’ve seen, the EX-ZR100 has a standard HDR mode that attempts to mirror reality but they’ve also included an HDR-ART mode that makes combines the images to look like the popular over-processed HDR fad mentioned above.


The Future of Photography?

HDR Cameras Future

The products above prove that there is hardly a camera manufacturer out there that isn’t experimenting with in-camera HDR capabilities. Pentax is by far leading this rush by including its HDR system in several different high and low end models. The others are a bit more hesitant but you can bet the threat of competition will continue to push Canon and the others further and further with their own systems.

The big question now becomes “Is it all just a fad?” Big dogs Canon and Nikon sure seem hesitant about jumping in and some find it hard to consider anything a professional feature until it’s on the 5D. Further, there are plenty of skeptics, like Aaron from Social Photo Talk, who think that real professionals won’t go near an HDR feature whether it’s there or not, similar to the “Auto” mode on modern DSLRs.

However, I definitely disagree and think that it’s not a far-fetched scenario that many or even most new professional DSLRs will have an in-camera HDR feature within the next few years, and we’ll all use it. The reason that I believe this will happen is because image quality isn’t a fad.

It’s true that cartoon-land HDR tricks have already overstayed their welcome (sorry Casio) but technology that improves the overall look of our photographs in a way that mirrors reality is something that photographers will continually pursue and appreciate. We’re never going to wake up and suddenly not want better photographs.

Simply put, if there’s a button on my camera that will pull more detail out of a tricky scene, you can bet I’m going to press it with zero concerns about the purity of the art of photography. Honestly, the biggest downfall I see at this point is that I would have to give up RAW, which I’m not willing to do in many circumstances.

It will be interesting to see if Canon or anyone else comes through with the promise of truly High Dynamic Range technology that utilizes only one image. This would certainly make in-camera HDR infinitely more convenient and usable.


What Do You Think?

Now that you’ve heard our spiel on in-camera HDR technology, what are your thoughts? Do you wish your Canon T1i had the same HDR feature as your iPhone? If it did would you use it? Most importantly, is HDR just a passing fad or are we seeing the tip of the iceberg in a long-term improvement of the dynamic range of our photographs?

Also be sure to let us know if you’ve tried any cameras with built-in HDR, what you thought of them and how you think they should improve.

  • Brandon

    Good article. However, personally, I’m not a big fan of HDR photography. What I love about photography is that I can’t take everything in with a click. For me, photography it is about selecting something that could probably be mundane or a specific detail, something that you would miss in our overly visually stimulated world, and seeing the beauty in it. IMHO the last thing we need in our culture is more amusement with bright colors and Alice in Wonderland art, but if people want to do it let ‘em be.

    On the other side, I do see uses for HDR, such as in landscape photography and being able to catch the highlights of the clouds and the shadows of the forests. However, this is the only inch I’ll give HDR.

    Really, idc if people use it, all I’m saying is I dont think I’ll use it, if other people do HDR, great, I’ll appreciate their technical side of their work, if there is good technique involved. But for me, I’ll stick to LDR photography.

  • http://dav3design.wordpress.com Dave

    Interesting read.

    I like the idea and do think it will be implemented in the future but like you said. It would only be the odd shot where it is needed.

    That being the case then I do not see what is wrong with using bracketing.

    I am not sure it is needed – but then it might develop where we would be given access to the RAW data of the HDR.

    I look forward to seeing how it develops.

  • http://g2g3.com/ Derek Watson

    iPhone 4 has HDR built in and it works very well in the majority of shots

  • revs

    The Sony A55 also has built in (3 shot) HDR. Works really well – just set it to HDR mode and take the photo as normal. One click. Its fast enough (10fps camera) to let you do it without needing a tripod.

  • http://shaneparkerphoto.com Shane Parker

    God, I hope not. HDR is already being abused all over the web, I’m so sick of it I can’t stand it. I don’t know if I’m more sick of HDR in general, or the modern, digital “interpretation” [read: tone mapping] of HDR. Either way, I wish it would die. (Note: I use traditional HDR quite frequently for certain lighting conditions that require it where I cannot correct those lighting situations with equipment I have on hand.)

  • http://hdr360pro.com/ Richard Sisk

    Great article Josh! I put a link to it on my HDR info site: http://hdr360pro.com/.

  • http://destructionoftheemptyspaces.blogspot.com/ emptyspaces

    Im not a fan of the way most people use HDR. But its still new to most of them, maybe they just need time to find out what its good for. Ill bet real estate agents could use it to take better interior shots, for instance.

    I played around with in-camera HDR on a Canon S95 recently and discovered the secret: using a tripod, or at least immobilizing the camera somehow. It takes three pictures in succession, so any slight movement on the photographers part translates into weirdness in the final file.

    Im sure camera makers hope everyone loves in-camera HDR, itll become a selling point.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/dmize/ Dan

    I use HDR some, but its only for certain photos. I think to some degree manufacturers will start to put it in camera. However, it will be like the auto mode and people who are making artistic decisions will not use it. It would be great for the people just taking snap shots. The idea of losing my raw data would be deal breaker on top off losing the control… thats the point of raw isnt it? My camera (Olympus e-620) has a feature called Shadow Adjustment Technology.
    From the Olympusamerica.com website
    Shadow Adjustment Technology brings out more details in shadows. It captures scenes exactly as you see them, even in challenging situations — for example, when shooting a backlit subject. Which is similar. Ill have to check but I think I turn this off. I dont want the camera making a decision if I try to do a low key shot and it is trying to adjust.

  • http://www.jacobshultz.com.au Jacob Shultz

    In regards to HDR photography, in my mind there are two very distinct types. The first is the stereotypical version which everyone thinks of as soon as HDR is mentioned. The crazily processed, over-saturated version which gets many purist photographers’ goat. This type of HDR is created using Photomatix, or other similar software. The second type of HDR is what I use in a fair amount of my photographs. This HDR is totally manual. You have control over everything you are doing. It eliminates halo’s totally, and again, allows you to control the amount of dynamic range you introduce to your photos. Even, which I would consider to still be in this type of HDR, using Grad ND’s when taking photos – That is HDR photography is it not? You are widening the dynamic range within a picture. The point of this reply is simply to separate the different types of HDR – to make sure that these different HDR techniques aren’t being lumped together in one big bad pile. In regards to point and shoots these days coming with HDR in-built, I can’t see how it can be a good thing. Surely it will decrease quality? Hopefully major manufacturers like Nikon and Canon will continue to stay away from it in their DSLR range.

  • http://www.istratov.be Alexander

    The true in-camera HDR is not to blend multiple separate exposures in-camera, but to build a sensor that can capture a high dynamic range in a single shot. Such sensors do not exist yet, but over the last 10 years, the sensors gained 2 to 4 stops of dynamic range compared to the first digital cameras.

    • http://RelativeState.com Nick French

      I might be wrong, but i am pretty sure the new Phase Ones, and Hasselbalds are pushing something like 11- 12.5 stops of dynamic range in their sensors….

  • http://www.stevendavisphoto.com Steven Davis

    not excited at all. i feel it cheapens the field of photography, and allows too much power in that hands of amateurs with no skill or good taste in photography. just like a newb with photoshop, you’d see a lot of twirls, and a love of lens flares :P

    also, HDR is all about the tone mapping, which a camera cannot do. soon we’ll see a lot of crappy HDR out there.

    • http://RelativeState.com Nick French

      thats silly… Thats like saying people who cant drive a stick should be able to drive cause they have to use an automatic transmission. Giving more people a look through the window at HDR ultimately introduces more people to the art form, and thus making more demand for it. Having more work beneath your station only helps to elevate and draw attention to your quality and professional work. If you feel threaten by amateurs shooting HDR, you must be threatened by Pro-sumer cameras being shot by those same people on the automatic setting of the camera.

    • http://www.serialphotography.com Alastair Moore

      Ridiculous. So HDR cheapens the “field of photography” but how about snapshots taken on a booze fueled Saturday night out on a mobile phone? How about the millions of photographs of cats found on the internet? How about the simple holiday snapshot? Photography shouldn’t be this thing put on a pedestal. What you’re saying is akin to saying people who can’t write works of literary art shouldn’t be allowed to use a pen and paper. Let people shoot what they want and how they want and you worry about your own art.

  • http://www.cegphoto.com Courtenay

    I’ve still never played with creating HDR images myself but plan to try my hand soon when the weather gets better and things start turning green again. I do think that in camera HDR modes will become popular once they are put into more compact cameras that the general public will want to buy. Of course, that will lead to the web getting saturated with bad HDR photos of just about everything but that already happens when any trend gains mainstream momentum. Over time the crap will fall away and really good photography will still get the attention.

    As for putting the feature in DSLRs, I’m a bit mixed. I’m a big Pentax fan and I like the idea of the in camera shortcut being there as an option but, honestly, I doubt I would use it much. I would think it would become something that gets used only in particular situations like some of the “green” shooting modes.

  • http://RelativeState.com Nick French

    I enjoyed your article. It was an interesting read. And i completely agree that most photographers will think its a bad add on. I think it is a great feature to have on the cameras at the consumer/mid-amateur/pro level. Beyond that and I feel like its a useless feature. I love that they are making SLR cameras more accessible and the different types of photography more open to the public.

    As you have a consumer with the appreciation for that genre of photography, you will have a bigger consumer base for that product. That product being Photographs of that genre at a professional level. I doubt that those cameras are capable of kicking out a HDR image similar to what i can produce with the right timing, framing, tripod and lighting angles. I dont trust my SLR to apply color balance correctly much less combine images in camera, adjust for ghosting or even know the best exposure gap to apply for the best effect. It might be only 1-2 stops to either side of correct and other times i might go 2.5 to either side.

    In camera HDR is a wonderful idea, and i hope it sticks. It would make for a lot more people looking for High Quality HDR work. Might even mean a few more of my prints get sold.

    Cheers!

    Nick
    Relativestate.com

  • http://www.nestorprado.com Heaven Ideas

    Hi there! This is a great post but I think there is a generally misunderstood concept about HDR photographs. Combining 3 or more exposures into one single image create an HDR image. This HDR image with a file extension of .hdr or .exr (among others) gives you the ability to reproduce higher ranges of light. What that means essentially is that and HDR image is more like what our eyes can see.

    Because of the fact the everyday screen displays, can not display Hight Dynamic Range images the creation of “tonemapping” or “exposure blending” was created. This process takes a HDR image (that has a huge range of light 13-some stops as said in this article) and converts it to a normal LDR (Low dynamic range image) that can be displayed or printed. What this process does essentially is blending the best parts of the image so the image looks perfectly exposed in all areas.

    This would be what purists don’t like, and why it may feel like cheating.

    So in my opinion HDR imaging is totally different from HDR + tonemapping or Exposure Blending (which is widely acknowledged as “Just HDR”).

    If you want to read some more about a post I did back when apple first showed the new HDR + tonemapping function in the new iPhone 4, where I talk a little more about this same subject feel free to visit the post:

    http://nestorprado.tumblr.com/post/1080831314/hdr-on-the-ios-4-1

    Hope this helps to clear some issues on talking about HDR photography as good or bad.

    :D

    more @ nestorprado.com

  • Sal Pedi

    About a year ago, I did give HDR a try and really didn’t like what I saw. But, I recently have been reborn, so to speak, and am now quite interested in it. This is how I see HDR. HDR can look pretty hideous when you first start using it and thats why I originally stopped using it. But, after I started using it again, I became more persistant and stuck with it long enough to come up with some pretty nice looking HDR photos.

    So, yes, HDR originally can be pretty ugly to look at UNTIL YOU GET TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT!…
    I have seen some most amazing shots done with HDR, but it does take some practice in order to make
    some good sense of it.

    Luckily, I use Photomatix for the HDR software which is very very easy for me to use. Yes, there are other kids of HDR software that are good also, its just that Photomatix, for me, is quite simple to use.

    I do also think that HDR photos do come out better if you use a DSLR camera. Yes, you can also use a point and shoot, as long as its capable of giving you three (3) consecutive shots with three different exposures. I have tried HDR on a Canon S50 point and shoot and can honestly say that the HDR’s come out much better with my Canon DSLR instead.. Personally, I’d rather carry the smaller S50 for HDR, but I”m afraid that I won’t like the HDR photos as much as the ones taken with my DSLR camera.

    I don’t know how long HDR technology will be around…..it could be a fad, so only time will tell.
    But, I for one, really love it!

  • Winston

    Very interesting comments… I have been looking at HDR. reading and watching. Will probably play around with it down the road. Just another form of expression in the photography world.
    Some of what I have seen is to me a little over done, but that is up to individual taste.
    As far as having it happen in the camera, I would rather do it out side the camera with software. Have to check into the different software available. Not in a big rush …. Good to read the different comments!

    WP

  • http://www.eshban.com Eshban Bahadur

    It should be in the upcoming Canon 8d

  • http://www.stanbowmanartphoto.com Stan Bowman

    In days of yore ( last century when we only had black and white film) photographers developed ways to deal with limited dynamic range. Hence thanks to Ansel Adams we had the Zone System whereby with control of exposure and development a photograph was produced that came closer to the dynamic range of the human eye. Now with digital technology the design of sensors is moving slowly and inexorably towards that barrier of getting a dynamic range that matches the human eye, and maybe ultimately surpassing it.

    The problem is that there are a lot of photographers out there who still love what older photographs of limited dynamic range used to look like. They are often the ones who hate what they see in HDR images and vow never to let HDR images cross their lips …. oops, cross their lens? But I rather think that they may be missing the point that digital technology is always moving forward and breaking the dynamic range barrier is on the horizon. I suspect that in ten years we will not even be discussing this as dynamic range control in camera will be so standard.

    What of those who love the old look of black and white film and early color film? Well this was/is just another way of making a photographic picture. I still have a lot of negatives from the 50′s through 80″s and I still love and appreciate the pictures I made from them on silver gelatin and chromogenic color papers. But time marches on and new technology and materials in photography is making new visions and pictures possible. Those who are forward looking will pick up the challenge to explore higher dynamic range imagery. But the old imagery of low dynamic range need not be forgotten as many will still hold on to this as a preferred method of working. But then there is no reason why the new expanded range photography cannot take a seat alongside the old and add to our enjoyment and excitement about photography.

    Not to fear, HDR (high dynamic range control) is here … and probably to stay.

  • Ron

    Thanks for the thorough discussion of HDR with camera names and links.
    I’ve been waiting for HDR all my life. I was a slide film shooter while my wife took negative color film pictures. I was jealous of the greater dynamic range she had access to. I’ve always wanted something that came closer to what my eye saw. I am intrigued by the cannon approach being researched. It sounds like that approach should allow RAW and get around moving subject problems. I find it difficult to patiently wait for all this to become available to me. I wanted it 40 years ago!

  • Chad

    I’m a real estate broker, and point-and-shoot HDR technology is extremely helpful for handling exposure and shadowing issues, for the non-professional photographer. Over processed photos are ugly, for sure. But subtle, easy to accomplish changes that allow one to photograph the inside of a room while being able to also see the water view through the window (rather than having over-exposed light bleeding in) is helpful. Some of us aren’t trying to be artists, we’re just looking for simple function. Mario Andretti might think you have no right to drive your Prius around (you artistic snobs!), but he isn’t necessarily justified in his opinion!

  • http://Www.philtragen.com Phil

    I don’t think built in HDR will become a standard pro tool, simply because it’ll undermine many of the characteristics that make photography exceptional. HDR means no more silhouettes, no more hazy backlit shots – all the things snappers use to make something mundane into something exciting.

    What’s exciting about photography is that cameras DO see things differently. Better, at times..

  • Brian

    For me, it’s rather simple. I love to hike, and I love sunsets… Can my $400.00 point and shoot capture that beautiful sky….and also capture the wonderful flowers in the foreground before me? Not by a loooong shot. My aim is not to cheat the “purist” ideas of some “photographers”, but simply to create an image that is as close to possible as what my eyes saw at that moment…so I can share my experiences with my friends. If in-the-camera HDR can help me accomplish this, what’s the sin in that?? Take care all…

  • Ben

    I remember my first experience with Photoshop – I pushed every slide to the max on every shot, especially saturation. But after a while, I reined myself in. I suspect the same will be true with in-camera HDR — millions of over-the-top photos all over the web, but over time most will rein it in.

    What I find exciting is the use of HDR in the hands of our master photographers. It is still a reasonably new technology, but they will find ways to use it with discipline, nuance, and good taste. Personally, I’m looking forward to sensors with expanded dynamic range.

    By the way, the acid trip at Disneyland comment was great.

  • Russ

    Very interesting article. Very pleasing on the eyes, and kept my interest.

    The question of DR, to me anyway, has to do, not with the processing, but the sensor. How long will it take to make a sensor that covers and surpasses the DR of the human eye (then we can talk about covering the owl eye DR.)

    As a parallel, the time between the red laser and the blue laser might be considered…It’s again, the building blocks are there, and the physics are that it can be done, it’s just R&D till it happens.

    In sensor DR surpassing human DR will come, and I have faith it is being worked on, it’s just not here yet.

    It would not surprise me to have triple the best DR’s of mid or large format film cameras available in sensor for prosumer cams in the next 5 years.

    Agree?…Disagree?…Let me know.

    Thanks.

  • http://www.keptlight.com Cema

    I see HDR as nothing more that a “new film with 18-stop exposure latitude.” The “HDR look” has nothing to do with the concept of HDR in my opinion. However, a well-done HDR photograph that retains highlights as highlights but with detail, and shadows as shadows but with detail can be quite a treat. the HDR look or the grunge look need not start with multiple exposures or HDR blending if that is the “artistic” end sought. After a series of comment exchanges, I decided to write a detailed position post on this issue if you care to read it.

    See the comment exchanges:
    http://www.psri.us/2012/01/free-hdr-photography-contest/

    See the post “What Exactly is H-D-R?”
    http://www.keptlight.com/2012/02/what-is-hdr/

  • Jacek

    Hey Josh,

    Great piece! Really cleared things up for me. I was wondering if you’ve had a chance to update this article? I ask because I am a new owner of a Fujfilm X10 and have just discovered the HDR built into the unit.

    From how I understand it to work, it seems Fujifilm is also taking a different approach to this and it might not even qualify as HDR photography even though the results sure look like it.

    The X10 can apparently turn off half of the sites on its sensor halfway during an exposure. So although only one exposure was taken considering how many times the shutter was opened, two differently exposed images are registered.

    The results I’ve gotten have been really nice and I hope I don’t end up using this too often because I want to learn how to perfect manual photography but wow is it tempting.

    Cheers.

  • http://shexbeer.carbonmade.com/projects/2831875 richard

    Hi Josh,
    I enjoyed the article,,informative and well written.
    However I do think the example ” acid trip at Disneyland”
    is one of the worst examples of HDR.

    I have included a link to some of the best I have seen.

    Thanks,,

    Richard

  • Ramon Leigh

    Johnson talks the reality of the world versus the severe limitations of cameras to
    image that world. A great image doesn’t mean a great picture, but I’ve never seen a
    great picture that also wasn’t a great image. If image quality weren’t important , as some
    claim, we’d still be using 2 MP cameras.

  • Cranios

    Anyone who’s ever uttered the words “you can’t capture the way [the Grand Canyon, Mountains, etc] look with a camera” knows that HDR is going to be the future.
    Smoothed HDR images don’t look garish or contrived, they look the way something looks in real life. Just because a lot of clowns crank up the detail level and the saturation beyond all reason, doesn’t mean HDR is bad.
    Once action shots can be done HDR, it will be here to stay. The objective of photography is to capture pleasing images, not to show off what good photographers we are!

  • Rock

    My next camera will have HDR capability, or I’m not buying it. The camera I want right now, doesn’t have HDR. I’m going to have to wait a while. I have an android phone and downloaded an HDR app (HDR Camera) from play.google. My HDR photos have greater low light detail with this app.

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/mycophagia aaron

    Gross!

    I think It’s a terrible idea because camera companies need to build better sensors that utilize a single exposure, rather than applying HDR as some kind of technological band-aid or crutch. Whatever happened to natural light? Auto-HDR just encourages any random photographer to throw natural right out the window.

    There are too many bad photographers who think their pictures look awesome because they slap HDR filters onto every shot, like it’s some sort of branding.

    I hope the HDR trend goes way south because it is frequently ugly in the wrong hands.
    If you want, join my Facebook group called ‘The Anti-HDR Club’

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/211025964177/

  • Jun Yang

    I’m a big fan of HDR too. How could our eyes beat our camera, right? However, my take is that future HDR camera should NOT use traditional HDR techniques (take consecutive pictures of different exposure). This would not enable things such as HDR video. With very small amount of work, it is possible to convert a normal camera to a real HDR camera, albeit it has some drawbacks such as lower resolution. see https://www.facebook.com/seekjim20/posts/490967504254892
    for example, if you are interested.

  • http://twitter.com/NandaLinnAung Nanda Linn Aung

    I love HDR photos, it’s just because HDR gave you another perspective of your photo. also i like HDR art.. it’s lovely if we apply in some photos.. a great read for me.

  • Rapzid

    Eventually most of the skill will be in composition and editing and not setting surfing(I actually don’t post though cause I’m lazy). There will always be people pushing the most out of limited media to great effect, but for most when the medium is no longer limited(accurate light capture)… I think that scares photographers just like automation scares those doing what’s getting automated. The reality is, though, that this will free us up for more interesting endeavors.