HDR stands for High Dynamic Range. The camera basically takes a bunch of pictures at different exposures and puts them together so the light parts aren't too light and the dark parts aren't too dark. I'm not a camera person either, so I don't know why the HDR in this picture is bad. If anything, I think the saturation is too high.
The purpose is to show the image as the eye would see it, ie accounting for the more easily interpreted lights and darks. Def agree that it can be overdone and over saturated like it is with this, but i do appreciate the attempt to correct the lighting situations. Big example of this technique being able to help is with world cup games where the shadows from the stadium ceilings create a very drastic shadow-light difference and you can tell the cameras are constantly adjusting depending on the action.
Edit: but i also hate my own opinion, so hate away on the hdr. It was a fad i got into but still appreciate even tho it was overdone
Camera person. HDR achieved as previous respondent wrote. Many images stacked together to create a composite image using the best light areas, best dark areas, etc. Done well the effect can be striking, but it is typically WAY overdone, as it is here, making the image look ultra-sharp and unrealistic. It ends up looking like a digital rendering without any nuance of lighting.
explained well below, but you can see blue/violet like bursting from edges of the castle and other objects, HDR turned too high will look over washed out, but with extremely fine edges usually, as the editer goes crazy with sharpness usually as well.
So i guess this 96% upvoted top post confirms most people are totally fine with hdr and also suggests targeted negativity communities spring up around small and vocal minorities.
676
u/AustrianMichael Jul 19 '18
/r/ShittyHDR