HDR or No HDR

After Morris calling everyone out to post, I thought I'd check through my archives and see what I could find that might be of interest. I came across this shot that I thought had promise. These light conditions didn't last long. At the time I took 6 exposures (N,-1,-2,-3,+1,+2).
The past few days I've spend some time trying to come up with a composite that I'd be happy with. Still not there but thought I'd post 2 versions to get some comments. The first 1 is a hand blended composite using 3 exposures. So what do ya think?

the 2nd is a HDR version done in Photomatix. Is it to HDR looking?

Yes.

No.

Sorry....couldn't help myself.

This is a stunning light show. Talk about right time and right place!
The only part of #2 that I don't care for is the almost grey skies in the upper right corner.
Otherwise, you did a great job with keeping this real.I just like the more richer detail that #2 reveals throughout. After you gather more thoughts and opinions, it looks like you could combine these images and get the best of both from them.
Again, I think this is a remarkable scene!

No. But first a question......did you use the same 3 exposures in Photomatix that you did the hand blend on?

In the 2nd one I think the difference in lighting of the evergreens from dark in the distance to very light in the foreground is a bit distracting. If you darkened the foreground trees to match the background I think it would look better.

I personally prefer the clouds in the 2nd one--more dramatic. However, the dark gray sky in the URC seems a bit weird.

Another question: Did you do an exposure blend (Fuse) in Photomatix or the "HDR" option?

I think both are nice photos and acceptable. In Photomatix I find that many times you need to adjust the midtones a little darker. The 2nd one looks like it could also use a contrast boost.

I prefer the detail in the second. Plus I see what looks like some slight haloing around the tallest peak. All in all I think it's pretty darn good and you handled the lighting conditions beautifully I agree blending the two might be worth a try.

I prefer the first overall, looks very natural to me as is, and some judicious dodging and burning could really make it sing. I do like the clouds and the foreground grasses in #2, but the evergreens and the mountains slope do look rather HDR-ish to me, at least in the context of the entire scene.

Nice comp! I like all the interlocking triangles. Between the comp and the amazing light, it's definitely worth continuing to work this one until you're completely satisfied.

I prefer your HDR interpretation, except for the already mentioned haloing and dark sky in the URC. Thanks for showing both versions.

I prefer the first one, the shadow areas and the clouds look a lot more natural. But you have yourself a killer shot either way

Here's a different slant....try processing this using LR/Enfuse if you have Lightroom...usually you can get some pretty natural results. That being said, you did pretty well with the HDR version..A few minor tweaks and you've got a winner there! You can get Enfuse for a very small donation or use the trial version but you are limited to 500 pixels...not enough to see the results.

I'm going to say thank you for posting this excellent shot first, Laurie. And then I will say I am in agreement with John on maybe taking these two and working an image with the best parts of both. The hdr looks very natural in the second one and just needs attention to the suggestions made already. Great light and good job grabbing it.

I'll echo John's comments as well. A blend of these two would be wonderful. Truthfully, either way it's a beautiful image.

Thanks everyone for comments and suggestions so far. I'll incorporate all your suggestions and keep working on it until I get something I'm happy with.

Mel, I really want to thank you for such and insightful and lengthly comment. It was soooo helpful.

Philip, No I didn't use the same exposures for each version. For the HDR version I used all 6 exposures and used the Generate HDR Image option. On the hand blend I used the N,-3 and +1 exposures.

Not too HDR IMHO.

I would suggest using the same three images for the hand blend and using Photomatix but use the "Exposure Fusion" option with H&S Adjust. Then adjust the sliders to taste (don't forget the "midtones adjustment" slider). I think you will get a very natural looking blend.

Hey Laurie,
Hope you'll consider reposting whatever you decide to attempt.

I like the first one but it could use some ideas from the HDR version. The trees in the midground of the HDR seem too bright. With the sun setting, you'd expect them to be in shadow, so the blend looks more natural to me. The clouds in the HDR are more dramatic and I like that, but you could probably get that in the blend with some dodging, curves, or blend from the -2 or -3. I think the slightly darker foreground of the blend looks more natural too. Nice job so far!
When doing these kinds of blends/HDR, I always find it tempting to open the shadows up too much, making the scene too evenly lit compared to what it probably was.

I prefer the first, but think you could do some more with targeted adjustments using curves and layers. The HDR is just too... much, to my eye.

I would try to bring up some of the brighter tones of the pines, add contrast in the upper left sky, and bring down the upper right corner sky.

Definitely worth the work, though!

I prefer 1, looks more natural to me. As has been mentioned, though, the hdr version does offer some advantages--for example the yellow ray glow on the peak is missing in #1, and maybe a brightness mid way between the two versions would be best for the fg grasses.

I prefer the HDR version (#2) in all respects. It just looks more dramatic. The clouds and lightbeams are better defined, the foreground grasses have the perfect amount of saturation IMO and the shadow detail of the evergreens is better. I'm not too concerned about the "gray" corner in the sky, it just appears there was some vignette applied which works for me.

I prefer #2, the only I would do is lighten up th upper right corner sky a little.

If forced to pick between these two, I'd pick the second in a heartbeat. Very dramatic! Ultimately I think the right answer (if there is such a thing) is somewhere between the two, but much closer to #2 than to #1. Awesome shot, Laurie.

After reading all comments and suggestions and trying a bunch of different things, this is what I finally came up. I used 5 exposures to make a HDR image in Photomatix. I used the HDR for the sky, mountains and trees. I had a lot of icky artifacts in the water and grass with the HDR. So I processed the +1 exposure and blended it with the HDR image to get the final image you see here. What ya think?

I prefer the detail and lighting in #2, I agree with Jack that LR/Enfuse would probably give you a more natural look.

EDIT: just saw the repost, looks great, very natural!

I am liking this one a LOT better!! Looks more natural.

I think what has been said really fits. A combination of #1 and and #2. I think your repost was a good fit between the two. Awesome shot!!

Laurie, very nice image. Lighting is wonderful. After you get the foreground colors to appear more natural given the light source, consider a BW conversion as you seem to have a broad tonal range.

Bill Brennan

Amazing ..

I like the repost best. And i have found this to have been a really helpful and informative thread. Thanks!

Great Laurie! Very nice.
I forgot to mention in my earlier reply that I often find with HDRs that it helps to blend the whole HDR version into the better of the original exposures. That sometimes helps tame any HDRish look. I think you've done very well with the repost!