Is the New York Times using very light HDR?

sjwoo · 12-23-2014, 01:37 PM

I just perused through the 100 Photos of 2014 on the NYT's site (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/28/sunday-review/2014-year-in-pictures.html). Check out this photo:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2014/12/28/opinion/sunday/2014-yip-july-...superJumbo.jpg

Doesn't this photo look kinda HDR-ish? Seems like there are other photos in the gallery that look like this, too.

EarlVonTapia · 12-23-2014, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by sjwoo

I just perused through the 100 Photos of 2014 on the NYT's site (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/28/sunday-review/2014-year-in-pictures.html). Check out this photo:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2014/12/28/opinion/sunday/2014-yip-july-...superJumbo.jpg

Doesn't this photo look kinda HDR-ish? Seems like there are other photos in the gallery that look like this, too.

That photo just looks like it was underexposed in the shadows, and then the shadows were given a substantial boost in-post. I'm basing that on the color of the arms, since that's what I see when I do that to my photos.

I am looking at this on my garbage work monitor, so I may be off on that.

Docrwm · 12-23-2014, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by EarlVonTapia

That photo just looks like it was underexposed in the shadows, and then the shadows were given a substantial boost in-post. I'm basing that on the color of the arms, since that's what I see when I do that to my photos.

I am looking at this on my garbage work monitor, so I may be off on that.

Have to agree. Also, there seems to be a good bit of movement in the photo - multiple exposure HDR and lots of movement doesn't generally result in sharp images in my experience. Could be wrong there but that's what I see.

JHfwp · 12-23-2014, 02:41 PM - **3 Likes**

Thanks for bringing this photographer to my attention. If this image really strikes you, you might want to take a look at the photographer's own website and study some of her work. I haven't had a chance to go much beyond the main page, but I've seen some pretty amazing stuff so far. If anyone is interested in documentary photography I suggest they check it out.

Meridith Kohut Photography

abmj · 12-23-2014, 02:58 PM

Have to agree with the others. Looks like "Lighten Shadows" and maybe a bit of "Darken Highlights" or "Polarization" in post. Too much of that sort of thing messes up the contrast and makes the image look like a comic book but if you use a gentle hand you can bring up shadows without blending multiple images.

That said, I don't see anything wrong with using HDR when it is warranted as long as it isn't heavy handed.

panoguy · 12-23-2014, 03:46 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

Have to agree. Also, there seems to be a good bit of movement in the photo - multiple exposure HDR and lots of movement doesn't generally result in sharp images in my experience. Could be wrong there but that's what I see.

Exactly this. None of the images in there are HDR (multiple exposures merged into one), but plenty of them are using the expanded dynamic range of a decent sensor with lots of post-processing (shadow lifting and highlight clamping).

Edgar_in_Indy · 12-23-2014, 09:16 PM

There seems to be some kind of smoothing going on as well. Anybody know what that's about?

photodesignch · 12-24-2014, 01:51 AM

When you have high dynamic range camera.. HDR is almost unnecessary unless you want those unreal landscape look and feel. Majority of photographers don't have time to wait for camera to process a HDR or taking multiple shots to do even more postone work. Pick a camera with high dynamic range saved most of situations. I have photos that are completely black on the foreground and saved the entire image by using "shadow recovery".

As a side note.. if you know RAW well enough, recovering highlight and shadow area is identical idea like HDR.. It's basically the same thing only you use what you have.. ONE RAW with all the dynamic range instead of 3.

sjwoo · 12-24-2014, 07:59 AM

Thanks, folks. I know very little of Photoshop (my knowledge is pretty much "Auto Contrast"!), so this makes lots of sense. And I wasn't disparaging the use of HDR, if that was what was being used -- @abmj mentioned that too much post-processing could make it look like a comic book, and there is a little bit of that here, which is what got me thinking. It almost looks like it could be a photorealistic painting in the vein of Ralph Goings.

Edgar_in_Indy · 12-24-2014, 11:07 PM

Yeah, there is something more going on than just lifting the shadows. That would not explain the smoothness of everything. In fact, lifting the shadows will have the opposite effect in the shadow areas, showing more noise. So there is apparently some kind of noise reduction and smoothing being applied here, which also contributes to the surrealistic effect.

mikeSF · 12-25-2014, 12:59 PM

it's a well exposed shot, IMO, perhaps benefiting from pulling back some hot sky and pushing some of the shadows to bring up the people. Modern sensors can handle this and it is good to see photojournalism keeping up with technology. thumbs up

rrstuff · 02-05-2015, 07:43 PM

I think it is lifted shadows and 'clarity' slider.

12-23-2014, 01:37 PM	#1
sjwoo Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 70	Is the New York Times using very light HDR? I just perused through the 100 Photos of 2014 on the NYT's site (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/28/sunday-review/2014-year-in-pictures.html). Check out this photo: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2014/12/28/opinion/sunday/2014-yip-july-...superJumbo.jpg Doesn't this photo look kinda HDR-ish? Seems like there are other photos in the gallery that look like this, too.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The future of photography - New sensor 1000 times more light sensitive?	David	Photographic Industry and Professionals	31	06-02-2013 10:13 PM
Ol good read from the New York Times	FullertonImages	Video Recording and Processing	3	04-20-2011 09:21 PM
New York Times: Video Shows American Killing of Photographer	johnmflores	General Talk	18	04-06-2010 02:45 PM
New York Times Photo Blunder!	casil403	General Talk	3	03-04-2010 09:41 AM
New York Times brief review of the K10D	mike.hiran	Pentax DSLR Discussion	28	07-03-2007 03:14 PM

12-23-2014, 01:49 PM	#2
EarlVonTapia Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Vancouver Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,207	Originally posted by sjwoo I just perused through the 100 Photos of 2014 on the NYT's site (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/28/sunday-review/2014-year-in-pictures.html). Check out this photo: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2014/12/28/opinion/sunday/2014-yip-july-...superJumbo.jpg Doesn't this photo look kinda HDR-ish? Seems like there are other photos in the gallery that look like this, too. That photo just looks like it was underexposed in the shadows, and then the shadows were given a substantial boost in-post. I'm basing that on the color of the arms, since that's what I see when I do that to my photos. I am looking at this on my garbage work monitor, so I may be off on that.

12-23-2014, 01:59 PM	#3
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by EarlVonTapia That photo just looks like it was underexposed in the shadows, and then the shadows were given a substantial boost in-post. I'm basing that on the color of the arms, since that's what I see when I do that to my photos. I am looking at this on my garbage work monitor, so I may be off on that. Have to agree. Also, there seems to be a good bit of movement in the photo - multiple exposure HDR and lots of movement doesn't generally result in sharp images in my experience. Could be wrong there but that's what I see.

12-23-2014, 02:41 PM - 3 Likes	#4
JHfwp Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 876	Thanks for bringing this photographer to my attention. If this image really strikes you, you might want to take a look at the photographer's own website and study some of her work. I haven't had a chance to go much beyond the main page, but I've seen some pretty amazing stuff so far. If anyone is interested in documentary photography I suggest they check it out. Meridith Kohut Photography

12-23-2014, 02:58 PM	#5
abmj Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Central California Posts: 600	Have to agree with the others. Looks like "Lighten Shadows" and maybe a bit of "Darken Highlights" or "Polarization" in post. Too much of that sort of thing messes up the contrast and makes the image look like a comic book but if you use a gentle hand you can bring up shadows without blending multiple images. That said, I don't see anything wrong with using HDR when it is warranted as long as it isn't heavy handed.

12-23-2014, 03:46 PM	#6
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by Docrwm Have to agree. Also, there seems to be a good bit of movement in the photo - multiple exposure HDR and lots of movement doesn't generally result in sharp images in my experience. Could be wrong there but that's what I see. Exactly this. None of the images in there are HDR (multiple exposures merged into one), but plenty of them are using the expanded dynamic range of a decent sensor with lots of post-processing (shadow lifting and highlight clamping).

12-23-2014, 09:16 PM	#7
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	There seems to be some kind of smoothing going on as well. Anybody know what that's about?

12-24-2014, 01:51 AM	#8
photodesignch Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 133	When you have high dynamic range camera.. HDR is almost unnecessary unless you want those unreal landscape look and feel. Majority of photographers don't have time to wait for camera to process a HDR or taking multiple shots to do even more postone work. Pick a camera with high dynamic range saved most of situations. I have photos that are completely black on the foreground and saved the entire image by using "shadow recovery". As a side note.. if you know RAW well enough, recovering highlight and shadow area is identical idea like HDR.. It's basically the same thing only you use what you have.. ONE RAW with all the dynamic range instead of 3.

12-24-2014, 07:59 AM	#9
sjwoo Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 70 Original Poster	Thanks, folks. I know very little of Photoshop (my knowledge is pretty much "Auto Contrast"!), so this makes lots of sense. And I wasn't disparaging the use of HDR, if that was what was being used -- @abmj mentioned that too much post-processing could make it look like a comic book, and there is a little bit of that here, which is what got me thinking. It almost looks like it could be a photorealistic painting in the vein of Ralph Goings.

12-24-2014, 11:07 PM	#10
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Yeah, there is something more going on than just lifting the shadows. That would not explain the smoothness of everything. In fact, lifting the shadows will have the opposite effect in the shadow areas, showing more noise. So there is apparently some kind of noise reduction and smoothing being applied here, which also contributes to the surrealistic effect.

12-25-2014, 12:59 PM	#11
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	it's a well exposed shot, IMO, perhaps benefiting from pulling back some hot sky and pushing some of the shadows to bring up the people. Modern sensors can handle this and it is good to see photojournalism keeping up with technology. thumbs up

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-05-2015, 07:43 PM	#12
rrstuff Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Pasadena, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,126	I think it is lifted shadows and 'clarity' slider.