Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
HDR Processing  
User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 914 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6689 times:

Quick question. Are HDR-processed images now allowed on a.net?


Whatever.......
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12897 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6685 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quick answer. No. Per the rejection guide - "We do not allow double exposures or HDR images."

If you were to ask a slightly different question ("Are there any HDR-processed images in the database?") you may get a different answer.   



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 914 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6640 times:

Well quite. I'l try that then.  

Are there any HDR-processed images in the database?



Whatever.......
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4863 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6639 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting scbriml (Reply 1):
If you were to ask a slightly different question ("Are there any HDR-processed images in the database?") you may get a different answer.

Oooh, I like it!   

Not just HDR. I would bet money that many forbidden techniques are used on images accepted here.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 914 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6634 times:

Indeed. Not sure why I thought specfically of HDR though.  


Whatever.......
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12897 posts, RR: 46
Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6588 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 3):
I would bet money that many forbidden techniques are used on images accepted here.

I wouldn't say "many", but undoubtedly there are "some".

The screeners are human and do occasionally miss something, but, from my limited screening experience, I can tell you they're a pretty sharp bunch and catch most things. That and the fact that many attempts at sneaking something dodgy into the database are so poor that they're painfully obvious.

I do wonder if improvements in editing software will make detection of unapproved techniques much harder.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4863 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6576 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting scbriml (Reply 5):
I wouldn't say "many", but undoubtedly there are "some".

I don't think "many" is much of a stretch at all because...

Quoting scbriml (Reply 5):
I do wonder if improvements in editing software will make detection of unapproved techniques much harder.

...I think we have reached that point, to some degree.

There are some AMAZING photographs on this site from many talented photographers. But in today's photography, exceptional post-processing skills often go hand in hand with exceptional photography skills. Some might disagree, saying one implies the lack of the other, but I think there are artists out there who excell in both aspects of creating a photo.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 5):
The screeners are human and do occasionally miss something

I don't think it's really a matter of missing something. I just think its possible to create a result so natural, done so well that they simply cannot tell the difference.

I think it would be incredibly naive to think that these things don't get past the screeners from time to time.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 914 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6567 times:

Then again, some seem really obvious to me, as a non-screener and serial rejection expert.


Whatever.......
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4863 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6558 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting derekf (Reply 7):
Then again, some seem really obvious to me, as a non-screener and serial rejection expert.


Indeed. There are some that scream certain, "illegal", techniques.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6535 times:

Of course some images with bad editing will slip through, though this is more likely to be the case with cloning than HDR processing. Still, given the number of images accepted each day, the number will be relatively small. On the other hand, some images that seem like they must have been manipulated to achieve their look are simply a result of great photographers knowing how and when to use their skills. There was one image that made it to the front page over the weekend that was called out as being HDR. Being obliged to check, we contacted the photographer, and asked for the original. All that had been adjusted was the exposure and color, so what seems like bad editing might just be good timing and skill.

As always, if you see something in the db that does not look right, be it HDR, cloning, or whatever, please feel free to contact us privately. We ask that you contact us privately both to spare the photographer in question from being called out, and to protect yourself from looking foolish should you end up being wrong about your suspicions, which happens quite often.


User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 914 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6522 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 9):
All that had been adjusted was the exposure and color,

Oh, is that all!

Legitimate or not, I know what I think about the almost cartoon, CGI look of the images I've seen. If that is what airliners.net finds acceptable now then fine. It was bound to happen eventually.



Whatever.......
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6516 times:

Quoting derekf (Reply 10):
Oh, is that all!

Yes. Are you implying something else, or do your images come out so perfectly that you have no need to adjust the exposure or color?

Quoting derekf (Reply 10):
Legitimate or not, I know what I think about the almost cartoon, CGI look of the images I've seen.

If you have a legitimate concern, as stated above please contact us. I have no interest in CGI-like images either, and am not aware of any rule change that would allow them, nor have I seen any such images recently. Have you?


User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5746 posts, RR: 44
Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6479 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 11):
I have no interest in CGI-like images either

Forgive me for using a non av photo as an example (probably a good idea anyway) for clarification.

So you would not like to see this kind of image in the DB??




Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6478 times:

Quoting stealthz (Reply 12):
So you would not like to see this kind of image in the DB??

Not sure what you're asking. Is this supposed to be an example of a CGI-like image, or have you done some HDR-like processing to it? If you have done something considered 'illegal', then you've done a good job, as it simply looks like a well-executed panning shot. Don't see how this would be considered CGI-like.


User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 914 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6463 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 9):
There was one image that made it to the front page over the weekend that was called out as being HDR. Being obliged to check, we contacted the photographer, and asked for the original.
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 11):
I have no interest in CGI-like images either, .... nor have I seen any such images recently.

Well someone must have been concerned enough to check out this image, whichever one it was.

As I said, legitimate or not there is something odd about the picture I'm talking about. It may just be the lighting but it may not.....
Anyway, I'm not going to call out the photographer, good luck to him. It is still a nice image, whether generated in the camera or on the PC.



Whatever.......
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5746 posts, RR: 44
Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 6423 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Dana,

Thanks for your compliments, I think the first comment is a compliment  
My first thought when I saw that shot straight out of the camera, was that it was some kind of cgi image, I knew it wasn't because I had pressed the shutter button only a few hours earlier, but it still looked like one.

It is indeed a full frame "well-executed panning shot" if a may modestly quote you. The terrain, motion blur and lighting just combine to give it a slightly, at least to me, unreal look.

The image above is totally un processed full frame, the only alteration being a resize for posting here.

Cheers

Chris

p.s I am going to try some "HDR" type processing on some racing and perhaps aviation** images

** You have my word I will not attempt uploading them here



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4863 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 6378 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well since we are using non-aviation photos, I'll use one to illustrate another point. Today's high-end cameras are capable of capturing a high dynamic range and with careful processing incredible amounts of detail can be pulled out of both highlights and shadows in one single exposure.

I used Adobe Camera Raw in CS5 to turn this...


Miller Park (Before) by Silver1SWA (Ryan Pastorino), on Flickr

...into THIS...


Miller Park by Silver1SWA (Ryan Pastorino), on Flickr

I did absolutely no HDR or fusion processing. No layering or masking. Just a few careful tweaks in ACR. This was with a 5D Mark II. This would have been near impossible without multiple exposures with my previous cameras. So the camera has a lot to do with what can be done with one exposure.

Another interesting point...With Photoshop plug-ins like Nik's Color Effex and onOne's PhotoTools (to name a couple), the amount of tweaking is endless and with great ease. However, these filters are basically applying complex actions that include layering, masking etc. Are these programs allowed simply because the effects are controlled with a couple of simple sliders while behind the scenes the program is doing things to the photo that would otherwise be considered bad editing?

[Edited 2012-09-04 07:55:06]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1375 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6367 times:

Won't the use of Shadow Highlight tool amount HDR, since we are increasing the dynamic range of the photo in question. or using the recovery tool and fill light options in LR. Or using layers in PS to change the exposures/ erasing some portions and then merging.
Using the term 'illegal" is not right, there is no law against HDR.
I don't think, personally, these are wrong, but just not what this website needs.
It becomes only wrong when you claim the HDR was not processed as HDR.


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6357 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting trvyyz (Reply 17):
Using the term 'illegal" is not right

"illegal" can also refer to something that is not authorised by accepted rules or regulations, not only the law.

As to accepted practices. in theory, regardless of the method used, if the objective and outcome is to make the photo match what we see with our eye (since the human eye has a much larger dynamic range than a sensor), and not essentially altering the actual composition (removing physical elements, adding others in), shouldn't that be ok?



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4863 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6355 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting trvyyz (Reply 17):
Using the term 'illegal" is not right, there is no law against HDR.

Come on. We all know by "illegal" we mean against anet's rules, NOT that HDR breaks any law.

Quoting trvyyz (Reply 17):
Won't the use of Shadow Highlight tool amount HDR, since we are increasing the dynamic range of the photo in question. or using the recovery tool and fill light options in LR. Or using layers in PS to change the exposures/ erasing some portions and then merging.

The first two are allowed here as long as the methods are used carefully. The layer method, although accomplishing the same thing, is not allowed. Which is funny because the first two will produce halos which will tip the screeners off as overuse. But the layer method can produce a similar result but is good for avoiding halos.

Bottom line is, Airliners.net just doesn't want you tampering with images much, whether "legal" or not.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4863 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6354 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 18):
As to accepted practices. in theory, regardless of the method used, if the objective and outcome is to make the photo match what we see with our eye (since the human eye has a much larger dynamic range than a sensor), and not essentially altering the actual composition (removing physical elements, adding others in), shouldn't that be ok?

I think so. But the crew have to draw the line somewhere.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1375 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6349 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 18):
"illegal" can also refer to something that is not authorised by accepted rules or regulations, not only the law.

Agreed, but in Photography HDR is not illegal. Throwing that term around makes it look wrong to unfamiliar people. HDR is not allowed on A.net, doesn't make it illegal.

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 19):
Come on. We all know by "illegal" we mean against anet's rules, NOT that HDR breaks any law.

I get it. I have come across people saying that even cropping or adjusting levels is cheating. People also say shooting raw is lame because one cannot get it right in the camera etc.

Basically I would agree to HDR to the point it looks natural (as seen with eye/ DR of human eye). Anything above that would be not pleasing to me. but the photographer as an artist may do according to his imagination.

I understand A.net being a DB would like to record images in an accurate way without adverse manipulations and not necessarily accommodate extreme editing styles.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6344 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 19):
Bottom line is, Airliners.net just doesn't want you tampering with images much, whether "legal" or not.

That's pretty much it.

To be clear, what we really don't want is combining multiple exposures into one image, as HDR is traditionally done. This is supposed to be a database, so combining multiple images is not allowed, and you will find most journalistic organisations will have the same restrictions for their images. Use of the shadow/highlight tool is sanctioned here, though only in moderation. Its overuse often leads to editing rejections, so is best avoided if possible.

In the end, if you have a well planned and executed shot, you shouldn't need to use the s/h tool.

Quoting stealthz (Reply 15):
Thanks for your compliments, I think the first comment is a compliment

Yes, it was.


User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1375 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6336 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 22):
This is supposed to be a database, so combining multiple images is not allowed, and you will find most journalistic organisations will have the same restrictions for their images.

That is the one job, afaik, where you could destroy your career by image manipulation.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 22):
In the end, if you have a well planned and executed shot, you shouldn't need to use the s/h tool.

May be true for aviation   But as long a the camera sensor DR is less than the Human eye, some use of the tool or likewise will be needed for other types of photography where the scale between shadows and highlights is large, even the 8 bit jpgs reduce the dynamic range compared to the info in the raw files of the sensor.


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 769 posts, RR: 16
Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 6279 times:

To a certain extent, A.net is trying to put the lid on a can of worms - and I sympathise with that.

Yes, it should be possible to produce excellent quality shots without any need for postprocessing whatsoever.

Many of us used to do that. We called it 'shooting slides'

Ultimately as software gets more and more clever, the A.net rules look more antiquated and arbitrary. There are tools which can make an HDR image from a single exposure, automatically. People could use this without even being aware of what processing is actually taking place. Photoshop's 'smart sharpen' quickly does what used to require tedious layering and masking.

I don't know what the answer is to this - I don't think A.net is 'wrong' or 'right'. But I do think they will have an increasingly difficult time in devising and enforcing appropriate rules.

Personally I came to a decision a long time ago - any means available to produce the photographer's intent is completely acceptable (as has always been the case throughout the history of photography ... ever see a true master of the darkroom at work?) the only sin is misrepresentation ie. presenting a manipulated image as fact.

In my opinion, the "capture" is just the starting point on the path to a finished image. The experienced photographer will often shoot with postprocessing in mind, for example, selecting an exposure which may look wrong on the camera LCD, but will provide a quality image after adjusting the tone curves in post.

Cheers.

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4863 posts, RR: 25
Reply 25, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6300 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ckw (Reply 24):
In my opinion, the "capture" is just the starting point on the path to a finished image. The experienced photographer will often shoot with postprocessing in mind, for example, selecting an exposure which may look wrong on the camera LCD, but will provide a quality image after adjusting the tone curves in post.

   I couldn't have said it better. There are some, myself included, who see themselves as artists first and photographers second. The photography is part of a process to create a final image, just like post-processing. I discovered this about myself some time ago and as a result have spent less time and effort uploading here. I will upload from time to time, but I enjoy a more creative process.

And just because I do enjoy a more artistic approach that combines a heavy emphasis on post-processing, it doesn't mean I don't work hard at growing as a photographer. I still strive to learn as much as I can, but I do so for both photography and editing.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1375 posts, RR: 10
Reply 26, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6296 times:

I agree completely with the above two posts.
Just like when they teach composition, we are taught to learn the rules first, master them and then break them.

Similarly, these extensive editing would be meaningful only if the photographer already is a master with the camera (ie, can get it right in the camera, if he chooses) and uses these techniques as a step further because he finds the camera it to be limiting his ability and vision.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
HDR Images Allowed? posted Tue Jun 23 2009 18:45:34 by UnattendedBag
Good Software For Image Processing? posted Wed Dec 10 2008 10:37:26 by Phoenix9
Help Processing A Rare Image posted Fri Dec 5 2008 04:43:20 by JakTrax
Canon Raw Processing Using PS3 posted Sat Nov 22 2008 09:45:54 by Rtl
RAW Processing Help posted Mon Feb 18 2008 06:58:49 by Virgin7
HDR Images For A.net? posted Tue Jan 15 2008 13:12:32 by ThierryD
Batch Processing Help (Gimp Or Other) posted Thu May 10 2007 01:57:24 by TedTAce
Post Processing To Improve Quality posted Fri Feb 16 2007 05:16:25 by Vnvlain
Photoshop And Processing RAW Formats posted Sun Jan 28 2007 08:16:31 by Monteycarlos
Color Settings For Post-processing Software. posted Mon Jan 1 2007 20:29:06 by Avsfan
Batch Processing Help (Gimp Or Other) posted Thu May 10 2007 01:57:24 by TedTAce
Post Processing To Improve Quality posted Fri Feb 16 2007 05:16:25 by Vnvlain
Photoshop And Processing RAW Formats posted Sun Jan 28 2007 08:16:31 by Monteycarlos