Many thanks Gents. Here are a few more!

Hi-Res: http://www.flickr.com/photos/26871905@N06/sets/72157622373262317/







Now...which do you guys like better? B/W or color?

The color one is very nice but I like the B&W picture better for some reason.
That's not normally the case.


Wheels

I vote color! Really nice shots.

There is so much color in the scene, I'm partial to the color shot, myself. Very nice photo.

Another vote for color. Just so much richness in the color and the detail it brings out. The waves for one. Nice pics!

Once again, thank you for your input!

The scene with Anna and I was rather challenging to get right with the equipment I had with me. I have several with her and the city taken at different exposure lengths, but the challenge was finding the right exposure time to not only let enough light in, but to be reasonable enough for us to remain still.

For the flash I tried using a Lightsphere, but it was too much diffusion. I ended up using the built-in diffuser and reflection card to bounce the light. The flash (580Ex2) was angled at about 60 degrees up and aimed towards us.

If I would have been thinking I should have taken a very long exposure without us standing there, then simply layer the two images.

Don't you hate how you think of stuff afterwards?

Anyways! I agree that the color one is nice! Next on my list is building shots, hopefully I'll have some of those up mid-week. I am currently working on my calendar, a new website, and photos. ...if anyone has any experience with Flash, I would love to pick your brain! I will toss up a link to my test page when I complete it.

20mm -

I didn't want to caption that photo, I was curious what people might think it is.

It is a sculpture from China that is currently sitting in Millennium Park. It looks like a giant moon rock dipped in chrome. The number of sun bursts coming off of it is truly gorgeous.

Check out the hi-res: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2669/3981109774_70aa73b40f_o.jpg

Slowly I am starting up post-processing again.

3 exposure HDR created in Photomatrix using -2, 0, +2. Increase vibrance and lowered saturation. Final step was to adjust contrast slightly and sharpen.

Taken in Millennium Park in Chicago, the reflection is from "The Bean", which is more or less an expensive chrome art piece.

The funny thing about the photo is that the 3 exposures I used all showed a clean reflection from the Bean. It wasn't until the HDR was created that all the hand prints and dirt showed up.

I haven't done any HDR stuff, and don't really know that much about it. If I understand right, the normal process is to take at least three photos with different exposures, then combine them together, but that it can also be simulated with software. I got the impression that you took one image and used software, is that correct?

That is interesting about the dirt not showing up until post processing. Makes me wonder what might show up in other shots.

Ken -

Traditional HDRs combine 3 or more exposures taken by the photographer. There is a setting in every DSLR called AEB (Auto-Exposure Bracket), this setting will control the exposure level for each photo. So in the photo above, I held the camera steady long enough to get 3 photos taken (one right after the other). I typically use Av settings to do most of my HDRs, then the shutter speed will change for each exposure, but my DOF will stay the same.

Hand-held HDRs are tough. You need to stay still and sometimes one of the exposures is blurred. I highly recommend using a tripod whenever possible.

The downside to HDRs is you can do it with moving objects. You can mask certain things, but to take a photo of an airplane taxing or flying is not possible. All 3 images need to be aligned perfectly.

There is another technique called pseudo-HDRs which can be done using one RAW file. It gives interesting effects, but more often than not, the photo will not look realistic and will be filled with halos and bad colors (like the sky turning a cyan color around objects).

HDR isn't just about layering the photos on top of each other. It's about enhancing the detail of every part of the photo. There is sometimes a compromise between detail and sharpness, but detail always wins out for me. This is called tonemapping, this is what HDR software does.

I spent hours upon hours learning how to use tonemapping and HDRs. It's alot of fun to go back to old photos and see what they look like in a pseudo-HDR format. I've considered doing a write up or a tutorial on HDRs, but I don't think it would be much different then what you find else where on the internet.

If you end up trying it out, send me some samples. If you look at my Flickr page you'll see all my early HDRs, they were awful compared to what I can do now. I might be able to help you over a few hurdles and give some tips.

I use Photomatrix for my HDRs, I highly recommend it, but I admit I have not used anything else. The HDR tool in photoshop does not do what Photomatrix does. The HDR tool in CS4 is crap.