From: Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Subject: Re: HDR rainforest
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!feeders.as203319.net!feeder01.as203319.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
Subject: Re: HDR rainforest
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:10:46 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <ov1tpn$18e$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <MPG.347ae4dd4462a16098cf19@news.supernews.com> <our5c6$2jk$1@dont-email.me> <EzekielTim.145a08d8@photobanter.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dtpsOvdEBAmGA2GXTGzdjg.user.gioia.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
Print Article
Forward Article
"EzekielTim"<EzekielTim.145a08d8@photobanter.com> wrote

| >
| > I don't like it because I don't believe the colour of the leaves.

| Now that you mentioned it, they do seem a bit too green. I like it
| though.

 I think the idea was to present a discussion of HDR
possibilities. He implied that the first image is HDR
while later links are to non-HDR images. In theory the
HDR image is closer to what your eye actually sees and
alows for more detail with extreme mix of lighting
levels. In practice it doesn't seem to work so well. :)

  On the other hand, it's hard to imagine a medium
that could do justice to the theory. We're looking
at the whole thing reduced to a 24-bit bitmap
displayed on a monitor. The result is garish and
inaccurate. But who knows whether the actual
HDR creation was?