Last Friday, January 13, 2012, The Washington Post published an HDR photograph on the front page depicting their top story.
“The photo depicts a plane taking off from Reagan National Airport, the 14th Street Bridge in the foreground and the orange glow of the setting sun in the background. The photo references the Air Florida jet that crashed into the bridge 30 years ago.” (source)
For anyone who doesn't know by now, HDR “is a set of techniques that allows a greater dynamic range between the lightest and darkest areas of an image than current standard digital imaging techniques or photographic methods.”
The overly saturated, almost comic or painterly like look and feel of the image, raised some concerns from readers.
They claim that the use of HDR was for the benefit of the image and doesn't change the authenticity of the image itself.
If this was personal work and not in the realm of photojournalism, I don't think it would have caused the reaction that it did. However, due to the intention of use, it raises a lot of questions.
What Do You Think?
Does the use of HDR in photojournalism bother you? Do you think it compromises the integrity of the original image?
Also, where do the limitations begin with photojournalism in regards to post processing? Does it stop right when the image is taken, or perhaps with minimal color correction in post?
As photographers, we would love to hear your thoughts on the subject.
From Pratik Naik: