HDR Photo Pro

[stevegonsalves]

HDR Photo Pro is released. HDR Photo Pro is an all-in-one High Dynamic Range (HDR) photographic application designed to helping you rapidly and easily produce great photographic images.

Website: www.everimaging.com
Screenshot:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5046/5267727554_efd752c341.jpg
Here is an image processed with HDR Photo Pro
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5047/5242797985_7d8f1925cc.jpg

[Leigh]

Is it free?

- Leigh

[Nathan Potter]

No, $ 129.00

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[D. Bryant]

Is it free?

- Leigh

What does the web site say?

Don Bryant

[stevegonsalves]

It cost $129 for HDR Photo Pro.
If you have HDR Darkroom Standard version, it cost you $50 for upgrade.
More info about HDR Photo Pro: http://www.everimaging.com/products/hdrphotopro.htm

[Bruce Watson]

Looks like SPAM to me.

But on the off chance it actually does have some relationship to LF photography... what exactly does this mean for LF?

[gevalia]

Maybe Steve should be told to add "Marketing" to his name. That seems to be what is allowed on these boards.

[Brian Ellis]

Two messages, both promoting the same product. Yeah, I'd say spam for sure. Hopefully moderators will press the "BOOM! BAN!" button.

[Ash]

HDR is possibly the quickest way to turn my stomach, and I'm the post-mtv generation

[D. Bryant]

HDR is possibly the quickest way to turn my stomach, and I'm the post-mtv generation

I think HDRI is a legitimate option for LF photography and I don't think the original post was spamish or out of place. The OP has made his post so let's all just move along. He wasn't hawking Viagra, tennis shoes, or cell phones, etc.

Don Bryant

[Paul_C]

He wasn't hawking Viagra, tennis shoes, or cell phones, etc.

Well-targeted spam is still spam.

[Ben Syverson]

As far as I know, it's okay to post potentially relevant product announcements to this section of the forum. Is that correct?

I love HDR as a scanning strategy, but anytime I see a local adjustment halo, I know I'm looking at the work of an amateur.

[Ash]

I'm not saying the OP is spamming, I honestly can't stand HDR. The majority of users fail to embrace subtlety

[Ben Syverson]

The majority of users fail to embrace subtlety
I agree 100% about HDR, but I think the above statement broadly applies to most photography. Whether they're blasting people with 12 strobes or swirling the background to oblivion with a Petzval, most photographers are not concerned with subtlety. :)

[D. Bryant]

Well-targeted spam is still spam.

Paul his post was properly posted to the correct forum, brief - to the point, and apropos to the entire site.

One of the criteria of SPAM, at least in my view, is that it is indiscriminate and out of context. I don't think the post fails either of these criteria, but we can let the moderators decide what, if anything to do about the post.

Don Bryant

[Ken Lee]

It's just an announcement about some photo software.

[gevalia]

1st and only post. It's spam. He's just good at it.

[rdenney]

1st and only post. It's spam. He's just good at it.

But what if he was announcing a product that you really wanted?

Rick "whose hidden agenda buzzer is going off" Denney

[gevalia]

But what if he was announcing a product that you really wanted?

Rick "whose hidden agenda buzzer is going off" Denney

Like I said in my previous post on this, if it is his product, let him put "marketing" by his name. That seems to be what the moderators accept on these forums to allow for this sort of thing. But with 1 post, I'd be more inclind to believe it's just spam. Well directed spam is still spam.

[Scott Walker]

If the post came from someone at Kodak stating that they were bringing back 25 sheet boxes of 8x10 film no one would be crying spam, just because you don't like HDR does not make the guys post spam