True HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography represents a monumental leap forward in how we experience images, arguably the most significant advancement in display technology since the advent of color. Yet, its potential is often overshadowed by confusion with “old HDR,” a technique that shares a name but little else in substance. This guide aims to clarify the distinct differences between these approaches and illuminate why the new HDR is genuinely revolutionary.
The Legacy of “Old” HDR: Tone Mapping Techniques
“Old” HDR, often associated with software like Photomatix, Nik HDR Efex Pro, and even features within Luminar Neo (through “HDR merge”), gained considerable popularity, notably championed by artists like Trey Ratcliff. While it once held sway, its prevalence has diminished over the past decade, transitioning from a mainstream trend to a more niche application.
An example of photography associated with Trey Ratcliff, illustrating the style of “old” HDR processing.
Most photographers are acquainted with old HDR. Some valued its ability to unveil shadow details and enrich colors and local contrast. Conversely, many criticized it for producing excessive noise, unrealistically bright shadows, oversaturated colors, and a departure from natural realism. Like an Old Benz, while once groundbreaking, this technique can sometimes appear dated in its execution when compared to modern advancements.
It’s crucial to acknowledge that, like any tool, the old HDR technique’s output is heavily dependent on the user’s skill. Improper processing often led to suboptimal results. When used judiciously, however, it could be a subtle enhancement. Think of it as a filter, best applied with restraint. Overdoing it, similar to pushing an old Benz beyond its limits, often yields undesirable outcomes. The point is that any tool, regardless of its era, can be misused.
Technically, old HDR is “tone mapping” high dynamic range image data to an SDR (Standard Dynamic Range) display. Essentially, it’s a workaround for the limitation of traditional monitors, which could not fully display the dynamic range captured by modern cameras. SDR monitors typically handle around 8 stops of dynamic range, while digital cameras have long been capable of capturing 14-15 stops or more. Displaying this rich data on a limited SDR screen necessitates compromise. Options include reducing contrast, discarding data (clipping highlights/shadows), or a combination of both.
Standard RAW processing usually addresses this by compressing and clipping highlights, prioritizing shadow and midtone detail. This can lead to desaturated highlights; for instance, brightening a blue sky beyond a blue sub-pixel’s capacity requires engaging red and green subpixels, resulting in a whiter sky. Darkening the image can recover sky detail but sacrifices shadow information. These are inherent trade-offs.
Old HDR (tone mapping) offered an alternative approach. It aimed to simulate a wider dynamic range without clipping, using algorithms to preserve local contrast. These algorithms are responsible for the characteristic look of tone-mapped images, which can be polarizing. The results vary based on software and user settings, much like how different mechanics might approach maintaining an old Benz, each with their own touch.
A common misconception is that tone mapping requires merging multiple exposures to increase dynamic range. This is often unnecessary, as a well-exposed RAW file already contains more dynamic range than an SDR monitor can display. Merging exposures can reduce shadow noise but isn’t essential for tone mapping and is frequently overused. Whether using single or multiple exposures is secondary; the core difference lies in the display technology targeted.
Ultimately, the maximum dynamic range remains constrained by the SDR monitor’s capabilities, regardless of whether standard RAW processing or old HDR methods are used. The crucial takeaway is that old HDR was designed for technological limitations that are becoming increasingly obsolete with advancements in display technology. New, superior options are now available.
It’s worth noting that software like Lightroom and Adobe Camera RAW support both old and new HDR approaches. The old approach in Lightroom uses “merge to HDR” without activating the subsequent “HDR” editing mode.
An illustration of “old” HDR tone mapping, demonstrating the software-based attempt to expand dynamic range within SDR limitations.
The Dawn of “New” HDR: Display Technology Unleashed
“New” HDR tackles the dynamic range challenge with a fundamentally different and superior strategy: leveraging advanced monitor technology. This new paradigm relies on displays capable of producing significantly brighter pixels while maintaining deep blacks, thanks to technologies like mini-LED and bright OLED. Imagine the difference between the dim headlights of an old Benz and the bright, modern LED headlights of today – a similar leap in visual clarity.
Monitor brightness is measured in “nits” (or cd/m^2). Older SDR displays typically peak at 100-200 nits, while new HDR monitors range from 400 to 1600 nits, with 1000 nits often considered the threshold for a truly transformative HDR experience, especially in darker environments.
These HDR displays offer up to 4 additional stops of dynamic range compared to SDR. While still not fully matching the capability of RAW files, they significantly close the gap. This eliminates the need for aggressive compromises in highlights through contrast reduction, clipping, or tone mapping. The result is more vibrant sunsets, city lights that genuinely glow, and an overall image that more faithfully represents the real-world light captured by the camera.
So, new HDR is true high dynamic range display of high dynamic range image data. While some dynamic range compression might still be necessary, the limits are far higher, minimizing compromises compared to SDR editing.
Experiencing a properly edited HDR photograph on a quality HDR monitor is essential to grasp its impact. It’s akin to understanding the richness of a high-fidelity stereo compared to a vintage AM radio. Witnessing HDR firsthand often elicits reactions like “wow!” and “everything else looks dull in comparison.” To see it yourself, view comparison images in Chrome on Apple Silicon MacBook Pros (M1 or later).
Are HDR-processed images inherently better? In many cases, especially for scenes with dramatic lighting, the improvement is striking. However, HDR isn’t universally beneficial. Just as not every journey requires the power of a modern sports car when a classic old Benz suffices for a leisurely drive, HDR is most impactful when the scene’s dynamic range demands it. Subjects like sunset landscapes, blue-hour cityscapes, or concerts with stage lighting are prime candidates. Corporate headshots or softly lit wildlife close-ups might not benefit as much. HDR excels where SDR limitations previously compromised highlight detail and color, elements crucial to the visual narrative.
A depiction of “new” HDR display technology, showcasing the expanded dynamic range and brighter highlights achievable with modern HDR monitors.
Debunking Misconceptions About New HDR
Even among those aware of new HDR display technology, several misconceptions persist.
Firstly, HDR displays are often perceived as rare. While less common for external monitors, they are prevalent in other devices. Most modern TVs (since around 2016), smartphones (past 3-4 years), and Apple monitors (since 2018, especially MacBook Pros since 2020) feature HDR capabilities. PC laptops with 600+ nit OLED displays are also increasingly available. The software and content ecosystem has been catching up, and with Instagram’s HDR support, widespread appreciation is becoming more feasible.
Cost remains a barrier for external HDR monitors. Being newer technology, they command a premium. However, brands like ASUS offer options across price points. Using a TV as a monitor can be a cost-effective alternative, with used 42″ LG C2 models potentially available at reasonable prices. Prices and availability are expected to improve. Resources like recommended HDR monitor lists offer further guidance.
Secondly, concerns exist about sharing HDR images with SDR users. Fortunately, a solution exists: “gain maps.” This encoding method embeds both SDR and HDR versions within a single image. This ensures backward compatibility, providing an optimal viewing experience for everyone, regardless of display capability. With the gain map ISO standard nearing finalization, 2025 is poised to be a pivotal year for HDR adoption.
Thirdly, HDR printing is often questioned. Directly printing HDR images will likely yield poor results, as prints cannot replicate HDR brightness. However, workflows supporting both print and HDR display are easily achievable. Editing for print can automatically generate an enhanced HDR image, streamlining the process. Many images are never printed, and HDR display simplifies editing for screen viewing.
Fourthly, concerns about HDR images being too bright sometimes arise. This can occur with poorly edited HDR content viewed in very dark environments. However, properly edited HDR images primarily use the HDR range for highlights, not overall brightness. While misuse is possible, even the brightest HDR pixels (around 1600 nits) are significantly dimmer than real-world light sources. Furthermore, screen brightness adjustments mitigate potential discomfort. Some reported “eye strain” from HDR content have even been traced back to viewing SDR content on non-HDR displays, highlighting the complexity of perception. As HDR evolves, software improvements, such as ambient light-aware peak brightness limiting, may further refine the viewing experience. User preferences and individual sensitivities also play a role.
HDR technology is still evolving, and ongoing improvements are expected. Many concerns stem from misinformation, lack of experience, the learning curve associated with new technology, or overlooking the rapid progress in the field. Exploring HDR firsthand is recommended before forming definitive opinions.
Conclusion: Embracing the Future of Visuals
Both old and new HDR approaches aim to maximize the potential of high dynamic range RAW files. Old HDR tone mapping sought to represent this data within SDR limitations. New HDR display technology eliminates these compromises, finally allowing monitors to match the dynamic range captured by our cameras for decades.
This advanced hardware is increasingly common in TVs, smartphones, and Apple displays, with rapid advancements continuing. Software and browser support are catching up. With the gain map standard and growing platform support like Instagram, sharing HDR content with a broad audience is becoming seamless, without compromising the experience for SDR users. Now is the ideal time to experiment with HDR editing. The ability to share HDR work is set to expand dramatically, making HDR an integral part of photography’s future, offering a significantly enhanced visual experience.
