Is this HDR?

[WhoDo]

I'm not really sure what your argument or point is? That we can call images that look to have a high dynamic range, even if they've not used the traditional HDR tools to process them, HDR images?

If you want, I guess. I'm not sure what that achieves though. HDR in photography terms is just a post-processing method. Why not just call them photographs?

I was only wondering what HDR is in purely technical terms, Welly. Ricks answer about the ranges of sensors, eyes and printers was helpful to that end. HDR processing came about as a means to overcome the limitations of the sensor, so when and if sensors reach 20-25 stops of dynamic range then there will be no need for bracketed shots and HDR processing. The discussion that sparked this was the one referenced in the original post where I understand Matt Kosklowski is saying that HDR is already redundant as a tool because sensors are so good these days. The answer provided me in this thread is "not yet, they're not".

The "pseudo" HDR effect produced in the image above was made with one of Matt's Lightroom presets (Free if you are interested and follow the link above) but what it really does is give only the appearance of HDR within the given number of stops the sensor is capable of capturing in one image. I just wanted to get my head around all of that, and spark a tiny bit of thought on the subject, that's all.