I think it depends on the eye of the practitioner as some folks have definitely gone over the top HDR-wise creating an almost hand colored postcard look to things. Certainly clouds can get a weird look to them when worked on by a what I would call a novice as they tend to add way too much drama that wasn't in the original scene. In re:to your question, I think it's a combination of what we're used to seeing, surprise at the range from our lowered expectations from digital up till recently, and users getting a little heavy handed in their use of the method. Your examples didn't seem too heavy handed for the most part. In B&W I'd be bleaching and dodging and burning like crazy to achieve that range....or is it just my negs? ;) Eric ________________________________ From: Tim Daneliuk <tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Fri, January 28, 2011 10:24:38 AM Subject: [pure-silver] Today's Watercooler Discussion: Dynamic Range Monochrome film photographers routinely handle well over 16 stops of light. Digital ... not so much. They resort to HDR techniques like this: http://www.perfectphotoblog.com/high-dynamic-range-images-hdri-before-and-after-landscapes/1201/ I judge these to be quite beautiful but ... they don't look "real" to me. To my eye they seem more "surreal". So, here's the question: Is this a byproduct of the digital manipulation process OR are we so used to seeing color without a lot of dynamic range (even color film is pretty limited by comparison to B&W) that when we see a full dynamic range color image it seems "fake". Discuss amongst yourselves... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tim Daneliuk tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ============================================================================================================= To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.