Lichen of the slowest pace [HDR]
![Lichen of the slowest pace [HDR] My first go at HDR: 3 pictures shot at 100ISO and long exposure times, plus and minus 2 EV, 13sec, 2.5sec,30sec). It's reindeer lichen, a very slow growing lichen eaten by mainly Reindeer/Caribou.
This lichen I found while hiking up in Norway with my wife. It is highly protected and it is absolutely forbidden to break off. This loose piece photographed here I found on the ground in a swamp, it was partially eaten. I did not have to break it off, only pick it up, so I was kinda in the clear.
I did not know the reason for it having such a protected state. Years later I read about their very very slow growth rate.
Reindeer lichen is slow growing (only 3–5 mm per year) and may take decades to return once overgrazed, burned, trampled, or otherwise consumed. This piece is about 4cm in radius, so about 10 years old. I did not know that..
This piece is about 10 years in my possession now, residing in one of our book shelves. It is battered a bit, discoloured too. I'll have to make due. Cladonia rangiferina,Geotagged,HDR,Norway,macro,reindeer lichen,soligor 36mm](http://media.jungledragon.com/images/240/4837_medium.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=05GMT0V3GWVNE7GGM1R2&Expires=1371686410&Signature=FgmF8AIJpOL1uJDYOU2Kl%2B5GGGQ%3D)
My first go at HDR: 3 pictures shot at 100ISO and long exposure times, plus and minus 2 EV, 13sec, 2.5sec,30sec). It's reindeer lichen, a very slow growing lichen eaten by mainly Reindeer/Caribou.
This lichen I found while hiking up in Norway with my wife. It is highly protected and it is absolutely forbidden to break off. This loose piece photographed here I found on the ground in a swamp, it was partially eaten. I did not have to break it off, only pick it up, so I was kinda in the clear.
I did not know the reason for it having such a protected state. Years later I read about their very very slow growth rate.
Reindeer lichen is slow growing (only 3–5 mm per year) and may take decades to return once overgrazed, burned, trampled, or otherwise consumed. This piece is about 4cm in radius, so about 10 years old. I did not know that..
This piece is about 10 years in my possession now, residing in one of our book shelves. It is battered a bit, discoloured too. I'll have to make due.
Comments (18)
Collapse replies Expand replies
Thanks for the inspiration and great examples of HDR:)
The first macro HDR it is. More coming.
However, I found that when shooting in RAW you can do HDR from a single image quite well. Here's an example:
In Lightroom I created two virtual copies, one underexposed, one overexposed. Then I feed the total of 3 photos to Photoshop and play with the HDR settings. I am not exactly sure how to compare 3 actual shots versus 3 virtual shots but in practice it works reasonably well. And the big benefit of course is that you will not suffer from ghosting, since the alignment between virtual copies is perfect.
For me hdr is the process of making and using different physical exposures.
Mine was taken using a tripod (long exposure..) and the software aligns the images (I use Photomatix 4.2.1) . Alignment is interpolation in potential, so that's tricky too.
You are right in your stating that there is, besides exposure, absolutely no difference in position. So maybe your approach is better.
I need some sleep:) I'll dream about it, I'm not that sharp anymore:)
The discussion of where post processing begins and ends is an old one, and a complicated one. My own stance is that I never change the actual scene, just things like color tone and contrast. Where I deviate, I will mention it. However, I can entirely appreciate other perspectives as well, from ultra pure to unlimited post processing. It entirely depends on what you try to achieve.
http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/23910/is-there-any-reason-to-take-3-raw-jpg-images-to-get-most-from-hdr?newsletter=1&nlcode=45109|4128
Short summary: multiple shots captures a lot more dynamic range, and is therefore better. Single image HDR is the next best thing if you simply don't have multiple shots.
That's a major positive issue in the age of digital processing.
I bet it went just the same in the old photofilm age of legend..
Read more about it in: