Reno

Brenton W. Cooper

New Member
This is a test. to see how big I'll fill your monitors!
20100829_0389B__C_tonemapped.jpg
 
The maximum width of a photo on the forum is 900px... Less than that it will be displayed smaller, more than thatthe forum will automatically resize to 900px (resize, not crop)

This looks like a photo Larry would have produced, very similar colours/style etc...
 
Who is Larry?
 
my eyes are burning here.........

Far to over processed for my liking, each to there own as they say....i am sure some will be impressed by your editing skills.

Daz
 
Yes it is.

Every image is captured in RAW format. Arm-chair photographers call it "over processing". But I can develop an HDR(high dynamic range image from one single image but converting the RAW image to a least three separate individual exposures in the TIFF Format and then blend them together through Photomatix Pro, then take the end result which has been tonemapped and process that again through Adobe CS5 and then process that image through an enhancement tool from Topaz Labs. Or I can carry around a good sturdy tripod and shoot as many as 15 different images with their own exposure values and blend them together through Photomatix Pro; Adobe CS5 and Topaz Lab enhancement tools. The result is always a HDR. That is what I like to do. That is all I ever do. Because I'm shooting RAW, the Raw image is never destroyed and it is possible to have a great many variations from one original image. Purists hate it. But to me it is exciting...and yes the really whacked out colors a person could get I try to steer away from.

Already, I've only shared a couple of images but the purists have already surfaced telling me that it isn't their cup of tea. Well, if it isn't then why waste their time by telling me so. Just my $0.02!

BTW:
I'm not trying to duplicate reality...even Ansel Adams said that is almost impossible. HDR is a creative medium and I like working through the techniques. Usually three to six hours per image just for one version. Then when it's all said and done then I convert the TIFF image or the PSD(Photoshop) to a jpeg and then it's never touched upon again. For the record, I'm not using any real fancy camera either, just a 50D or an XTi 400D by Canon or an 80D by Nikon. However I am using advanced software. I originally signed on here because I thought we could discuss photography, but I'm finding out that I have to defend my photographic beliefs not discuss them. Anyway...my website is putting jingle in my pockets and this isn't. Adios!
 
Brenton

you have no need to worry about the criticism on here, we have built a quite light hearted approach to it, as darren says... "each to thier own" ... i have a habit currently of making all my images slightly pink, some like it, some think it is over process... the key is, i think, if you like it your self then thats all that matters ... i find a lot of "under processed" images dull and uninspiring.. thats a sweeping generalisation that obviously doesnt always apply ... but for me photography is all about the process ... all of it camera to final image... if some people dont like the end results, then fine, it makes no odds to me, i enjoyed the process and the final product... that is what matters and that is what im trying to promote here.
dont feel you need to defend your self, im sure that is not what people intend, i have learnt a lot from this forum already, we can learn and teach each other... both in what we do and do not like

everyone else, please be aware that new members especially will not have had time to get used to how we have come to talk to each other round here... we dont want to scare people off... as i have always said, we can all learn from each other ... the more people turn up the better in my books ... so go easy on the new people ... at least until they have had the time to read what i consider to be light hearted criticisms in other peoples threads!
 
Gosh, there was one thread in which a calibration issue was noted, advised and acknowledged, another (this one) where Darren said he didn't like Brenton's photo, and with that Brenton has seemingly upped and left. Seems like an extreme reaction.
 
no offence or insult was meant by my quote above Brenton.

i think you have choose a nice spot to take the initial photograph, i would have preferred a straight forward image personally. I am not against editing in any way shape or form, lets face it there isn't many images we see daily in the media that haven't been edited is one one shape or form.

I would class you type of editing as a piece of art rather than a photography, and you obviously put alot of work into each piece. If you can make money from it well that proves there is need or demand for this type of image.

I have dabbled in HDR but have issues with halos so i Dont bother these days...........lol

Daz
 
There's certainly a market for the HDR, high color, images - there are a group of photographers around Sedona AZ where I shoot, who sell their HDR images in the local galleries for some serious money.

It's definitely on the art side of photography IMHO - people must be buying it though.

Hamish, I think the balance of things will win through - some people are more sensitive, some are more vocal - if we get a troll or two I'm sure we'll sniff 'em out.


Brenton, explaining what you do and how it works will be useful for those that are interested in trying new styles of photography - I also figure that folks will benefit from your experience as you launch into selling images, many folks here would probably like to do the same...
 
Thanks Chris.....but allow me to correct the definition of a Troll... In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-IUKB_def-1 In addition to the offending poster, the noun troll can also refer to the provocative message itself, as in "that was an excellent troll you posted". While the term troll and its associated action trolling are primarily associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels highly subjective, with trolling being used to describe intentionally provocative actions outside of an online context. For example, recent media accounts have used the term troll to describe "a person who defaces internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families."

There, that's out-of-the-way! Perhaps as time allows I now I could pen a thesis on using HDR. In fact, those same individuals you spoke of from Sedona are the ones that gave me the interest in developing my own passion for HDR. When we where camping there last year, I purchase a couple of 24x36" framed prints. Yep, they weren't cheap either! Yes there is a market for HDR and I too have made some sales. Artists are a touchy bunch and I are one! So I ain't leavin' and that's my final answer. You'll just have to get use to my sarcasm and I yours. Thanks Chris and Darren and Hamish. Sometimes I fly-off-the-handle and say crazy things too! My bride says sometimes "You're a lose cannon!" But I'll behave, promise! Thanks for them kind words!http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)#cite_note-2
 
Ah ha - the Sedona connection - I knew it! LOL
 
Good to be seen, period! Retirement sucks beans!
 
hi there brenton. While the image isn't to my own tastes, and isn't a style ive tried myself, i can indeed see that there would be those who would find it appealing and an enjoyable interpretation to look at. I'm (to some extent) more of a realist, and aim for images that although tweaked digitally, are tweaked to have them represent what my eyes saw.

Enjoy reading about the process you use to develop your images though, makes for fascinating study.
 
Back
Top