Is this HDR?

[ameerat42]

The foregoing discourse contains insights that most of us can appreciate, and appeals to themes that we could generally concur with.
The underlying polemic can hopefully serve to hone the ideas central to the discussion - such as it is - but can inadvertently fog them when they are pursued with too much vigour.

So, there are a number of replies from APers on his first Q, and after several interim responses by WhoDo, are we any closer to an opinion from him? There is an interim second question - not "begged" by the way.

After a while, the responses could tend to answering just the rhetorical, "So what?" Are we talking about the same thing?

Prolonged discussion, without much further direction, could even render this to, "Sow wheat!"

...and then perhaps to a second agrarian revolution?

A(bracadabra and a rabbit from a hat)m.

[WhoDo]

So, there are a number of replies from APers on his first Q, and after several interim responses by WhoDo, are we any closer to an opinion from him?

So as not to beat around the proverbial bush in hopes of flushing some "game" APers, I'll say that the processing done on the single original image does NOT qualify as HDR because it does NOT exceed the 12-stop limitation of the sensor in the final image. To be true HDR the dynamic range of the produced image has to be exceed that capable of being produced from a single recording of the processor.

There is an interim second question - not "begged" by the way.

After a while, the responses could tend to answering just the rhetorical, "So what?" Are we talking about the same thing?

Prolonged discussion, without much further direction, could even render this to, "Sow wheat!"

...and then perhaps to a second agrarian revolution?

A(bracadabra and a rabbit from a hat)m.

The tendrils of thought that meander through your visible cogitations, Am, are truly a marvel to behold. I think I disagree with Ezookiel's postulation on the posited second question as to whether HDR processing will become redundant when sensors reach the range of the human eye viz. 20-25 stops of light. I think it will. After all, what's the point of capturing more than you can effectively discern, much less display or print? For all I know there may be 1000 stops of light data available in the full visible and invisible spectrum, but if I can't see it anyway then, as you pointed out, so what? At that time I think I'd prefer to sow wheat!