digg

i saw this pic like a month ago here

still not impressed, i could create the look with several photoshop filter tweaks...

1. Take Three Different Exposures With Tripod
2. Download PhotoMatix
3. Digg Front Page

That's a little overdone, I've seen great HDR Pics , but when it's over processed in photomatix, then it ceases to be good.

these kinds of over-done HDRs make my eyes scream

I understand exactly how HDR works, but if you have to take multiple picture at different exposures, how do you do it when there are moving objects in the picture like people and birds?

Meh... Lord of the Ring sky doesn't fit. It's clearly a sunny lighting.

I'm getting very tired of HDR. It was kind of cool at first, but I'm more impressed by a nicely composed actual photograph

That is beauty? Its filled with halo's in light to dark transitions, no contrast and unsaturated color. HDR can be beautiful, that just blows...
http://esspea-photography.com/blog/

I personally like HDR, but when it's overdone my eyes experience an onslaught of colour. Is this because of tone-mapping? Please don't digg this down, this is a genuine question.

Dugg for all the complainers.

I don't really see the appeal of HDR. A lot of the pics (including this one) look really fake. I mean, this obviously isn't what the scene looked like to the human eye when it was taken.

I'd more so prefer a nice high resolution photo with vibrant colors that actually represent a scene, not something that looks like the coming of an apocalypse.

it looks fake like the lame cg skies in gladiator

I don't know what is with all the HDR haters. I like HDR photos. I even like them when the color is over saturated, though the "Halos" bother me to no end.
To me, its not as much "art" as it is just a different way to look at the world. Its like any IR or an UV picture. It can be a poorly composed picture, but I probably will still find it interesting. (at least for a bit.)

Horrible...

a gay storm is brewing

Mine's better.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/161/371483001_56271 ...

It would be even more beautiful if the photographer would just rely on composition of the shot instead of ***** with the color.

I'm absolutely sure this is at least the third time this is on the frontpage in the past 4/5 weeks.

It's not the best HDR image I've ever seen, in retrospect its kind of rough.
However those are some nice looking clouds.

Serious, i've seen this picture alot of times, and people always say it's the best HDR pic around.

My eyes bleed when i see it

Nice, it kind of reminds me of Japanese animation. Would that be Anime?
Anyway I liked it.

They should rename HDR to shroom mode.

I've seen this so many times its now burned into my retina.

Wow, this is now the third time I have seen this picture on digg. Good Job MakiMaki.

I enjoy the photo for its unique view of the golden gate bridge. I've never seen it from that perspective.

"I understand exactly how HDR works, but if you have to take multiple picture at different exposures, how do you do it when there are moving objects in the picture like people and birds?"

Photomatrix and other HDR generation software actually compensate for any movement and motion blur.....if there are any radical changes from the normal exposure in the light & dark exposure then it'll ignore the changes in those and keep what is in the normal one.......so if a bird flies through in the dark or light exposure and isn't in the normal exposure then it'll conveniently remove it.

Wow, you really ruined this nice shot by making it HDR.

Not of the golden gate bridge, but this is a better bridge shot : http://uploadingit.com/view/482296_6x4fe
This one too is also very nice : http://uploadingit.com/view/484054_aftvo

if you look at it in its original size, its not pretty at all

Too many times on digg.

boycotting HDR in Digg

Buried. Tired of this overdone HDR *****.

Amateurs like this give HDR a bad name. Good HDR: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/

I am not from SF, but I coulda swore that Starfleet HQ was right by the bridge...

Horrendous. Absolutely horrendous.

I don't like this photo, i've seen it many times, and it gives HDR a bad name.

I like it. It reminds me of old Technicolor film shot on tri stock black and white tinted stock in a huge, three reel camera.

HDR can produce some pretty good looking photos, but this is obviously overdone. I don't think HDR should replace regular photography, but maybe thats just me.

Dugg for haters. Although it does look like something you'd see in velvet hanging on a wall in a trailer. Next to a statue of elvis.

Going to have to say that this doesn't look like the Golden Gate I know. Too grainy, over-sharpened, etc.

Come on. Just because an image is in HDR doesn't mean it's the greatest image in the history of them.

Nerds.

I prefer photos that look even remotely real.

That photo looks like it has been photoshopped to death

if he wants to be a painter, he should paint. this is not photography.

HDR is great for a geewiz factor but I've yet to see anything that has been meaningfully produced with it in this fashion. The cartoonish nature of the image is neat for all of a second. If photographers focused on capturing a meaningful subject in a way that was technically impressive then perhaps they'd have something worthy of showing off. Taking an average photo and putting it through Photomatix doesn't make it great nor unique.
"Why I Hate HDR: Photo Technology Porn" - http://www.jmg-galleries.com/blog/2007/08/15/why-i ...

I'm currently using this as my wallpaper. :D