Originally posted by jogiba I use it sometimes in light conditions like this:
Yes! Now that is what HDR should be all about (whether it is done in-camera or during post processing). This is the first time I've
knowingly seen HDR being used to fix the highlights and/or shadows in a scene instead of using it to create impressionist art. Image correction is the only reason I would use HDR.
It's disappointing that the K-01 can only produce JPEGs in in-camera HDR mode; nonetheless, I would probably still use it occasionally. Most of the time I would probably do exposure bracketing and then do my HDR editing during post processing. My only question is, would it still be easy to get a normal (meaning non-impressionist) image that way, or is there something about doing HDR during post processing that intensifies the colors and makes the lighting look unnatural?
Yes, I know that tone mapping also has a lot (or everything?) to do with the intense colors and unnatural lighting, but I did a five-bracket exposure set (I don't know how else to write that) with my ancient point-and-shoot last year and ran it through a free, but highly rated, HDR editor (HDRtist), and the colors came out ever so slightly more intense than usual, so it made me wonder.
P.S. I wish my Epson 4990 scanner could scan in HDR -- or multi-pass -- mode and produce RAW files, although I guess I could rescan an image several times with different settings each time and just work with TIFF files; that would probably make a mess, though.