Posted on 09/04/2009 1:47:50 PM PDT by fishtank
Beautiful picture of a bridge in Kosovo (Bing Sept. 4, 2009).
I’m inclined to think it’s a painting, NOT a photo.
Specifically, there appear to be numerous errors in the lie of the shadows and other similar shading errors due to the angles of various walls and the assumed position of the principal light source.
One man’s opinion ...
21stCenturion
Looks like the ancient and famous bridge in Mostar, which was destroyed in the war and has since been rebuilt.
Check out this web site for some real nice photography -
http://www.timecatcher.com/
No, this is HDR. That's one of the tone mapping effects that occurs during processing an HDR image. This particular image could have been edited better, IMO, to bring out the shadows in some areas and reduce the blown out portions of the image. Another problem might be that too few images were merged at too close of exposure settings between shots, reducing the dynamic range of the image.
Excellent images. Most of these are HDR as well.
You bad. ;~)
bing.com has some really outstanding photos! Whoever is responsible for choosing them is doing an excellent job!
Bing isn't even change. Much less hope. It's simply a name change. Designed my Microsoft marketdroids to fool the sheeple.
(If you thought it was new, you are a LIV (low-information voter, singular of sheeple)).
Mostar bridge.
just so lovely! thanx!
Thanx, I think.
Not being HDR-literate, I had to look it up. Don’t know how to identify an HDR image by visual inspection but that’s MY limitation.
I DO still see numerous shadow errors — incorrect lie to the presumed principal light source — as well as strangely inconsistent detailing in the stonework. There are also ‘perspective’ errors which look suspiciously hand laid.
Perhaps these are attributable to human errors in the source image selection, tone-mapping, merging and/or other editing processes.
However, the net effect, for ME, is to render the image almost too ‘synthetic’ — pretty but unconvincing.
21stCenturion
Yes, this is a common complaint about HDR images. First, HDR is just another method, not a be all, end all application. It works well in some venues (certain landscapes and interior photography in particular) and can be garish and unappealing in others. Second, alot of photographers get carried away with tonal control in the post processing, or they get lazy and only take 2 or 3 images at close gap exposure settings to merge into HDR. Technique is critical with HDR and multiple exposures of 5 or more set in 2 stop exposure increments, shot in low light conditions with limited direct illumination seem to work best.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.