Welcome to this comprehensive guide to a new form of photography, called True High Dynamic Range (HDR) Photography, which will revolutionise still photography in the coming years. New workflows, enhanced displays, updated editing software applications and new image formats now allow photographers to embrace this exciting new world. As will be discussed, there is no absolutely no relationship between True HDR Photography and a set of techniques (also confusingly named “HDR Photography”) that became a major trend (some would say fad) in the mid-2000s. Whether this confusion affects the adoption of True HDR Photography remains to be seen.
What is “New” or True HDR Photography?
In the real world, the human eye is often presented with scenes with dynamic ranges (i.e. the difference between the brightest and darkest parts) and a breath and intensity of colours that have been impossible to capture with conventional photography. That’s because conventional, so-called Standard Dynamic Range (SDR), photography is based on ageing workflows, old, limited display standards and an outdated image format used extensively for sharing images – the ubiquitous, 33-year-old conventional 8-bit JPEG.
True HDR photography is about seizing the opportunity from the latest camera sensors, new systems and workflows, improved HDR-capable displays and improved image formats (namely, JPEG XL and AVIF) to deliver images to the human eye that better match what is seen in real life. Even if photographers don’t desire a true-to-life effect, True HDR offers photographers increased dynamic range, a greater range of colours and more vibrant colours – all in a file smaller than a conventional 8-bit JPEG.
At the end of the day, we live in a high dynamic range world, where there are often large differences between the brightest and darkest parts of a scene, and our eyes and brain use this information to make sense of the world around us. For example, bright ‘specular highlight’ are a powerful cue for human depth perception. In real life, the ‘wow’ experienced when viewing glistening gold, firework displays or cathedral interiors, to name just a few examples, depends critically on the presence of specular highlights, which are often intense light reflections.
The challenge for photography (and photographers today) is that workflows, systems and technical standards used to create, display and share images were developed in an era when cameras, systems, display devices and storage devices were far less capable than they are today.
Many conventional photography workflows have continued to rely on the ubiquitous JPEG image format, which was launched over 33 years ago, and which was defined based on the processing capabilities at the time. Back in the early 1990s, computer displays were bulky CRTs, offering limited brightness, poor resolution and limited colours. Kodak launched the first commercial DSLR (the dcs-100) in 1991 with a 1.3-megapixel sensor! While its dynamic range was considered adequate for photojournalism at the time, it was extremely limited by modern standards.
While individual technologies have advanced significantly over the years, many existing photography workflows are being help back. True HDR Photography now seizes the opportunities from the latest camera technologies, advances in editing capabilities, new image formats (such as as JPEG XL and AVIF) and modern display devices to create new, enhanced, workflows. With True HDR Photography, we finally have the means to create, store, display and share images that are more akin to the world around us as perceived by human vision.
Sample images demonstrate the potential of True HDR Photography
There is no better way to demonstrate the potential of True HDR Photography than to show examples. If your display device is HDR-enabled, you should be able to see many images in all their HDR glory here:
La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona – a showcase for True HDR Photography
Here is a 4k HDR video created from my True HDR photographs. Because of the resolution of the lossless JPEG XL used, I was able to crop images substantially without a loss of quality.
Why now for True HDR Photography?
While the world’s first surviving still image was taken in 1826, the first surviving moving pictures didn’t appear until 1888. In some ways, it seems counterintuitive that mainstream still photography has been lagging videography in the ‘HDR revolution’.
Dolby Vision was launched in 2014 – over 11 years ago – as a comprehensive HDR video system for cinema and home. Over the years, viewers have become increasingly accustomed to seeing HDR images at the cinema and in their homes. It would now seem bizarre if a top Hollywood blockbuster was not released in HDR format.
Unfortunately, still photography, particularly among professionals using dedicated cameras, is now the laggard to HDR videography. In part, this may be because there has been a stronger desire to provide a single image source that can be viewed on compatible and non-compatible display devices. An overriding desire for compatibility may have slowed market innovation.
Interestingly, it is mobile phone makers (such as Apple) that have been most active in trying to introduce early HDR capability in still photography.
Perhaps because (a) mobile phone cameras lack the image quality of dedicated cameras with larger sensors and (b) mobile phone displays lack the resolution of the best high-quality desktop displays, mobile phone manufacturers have looked for something that would favour their products – and HDR does that, in combination with advanced image processing.
Apple introduce its “Adaptive HDR” in iOS 18 (in 2024), which allowed HDR and SDR images to be stored in a single file, using the HEIC format (to provide superior image to JPEG). Modern iPhones can now capture, save, share and display True HDR images. The iPhone achieves a peak brightness (for HDR content) of 1,600 nits. Sharing of HDR images (to other iPhone users or Apple devices) is easily achieved using Apple Messaging.
While innovations often occur in niche, professional markets before mass-market adoption, early adoption of HDR images in mobile phones has created a rather strange state-of-affairs. Many consumers are becoming accustomed to taking their ‘snaps’ in HDR and sharing with their family and friends, while many professional photographers are still focused on producing non-HDR images. It seems odd to me that the latest digital mirrorless camera sensors capture greater dynamic range than much small mobile phone sensors, potentially making them best suited to True HDR Photography, and yet it is mobile phone manufacturers (and Apple, in particular) at the frontier currently.
2026 is the year when new systems, standards and formats are stable enough to allow many photography enthusiasts and professionals to start their True HDR Photography journey.
Professional photographers risk being marginalised if they do not. It is not a secret that professional still photographers have suffered challenges in recent years, particularly as many people now take their own photos on mobile phones rather than using the services of a professional. While professionals have often relied on superior techniques, dedicated lighting, advanced cameras and superior lenses to provide better images than mobile phone ‘snaps’, how will non-HDR images be perceived against HDR images taken by non-professional users, particularly when viewed on small mobile phone screens? Having a long list of half-baked excuses why True HDR Photography is terrible is not going to cut it!
Early experiences, and success, with HDR video bring important lessons for True HDR still photography. In research and trials of HDR for TV, the BBC found that HDR had a more impactful improvement to picture quality than increased resolution (HD to Ultra HD) for average viewers. Andrew Cotton from BBC R&D described being “blown away” by HDR images, describing them as “more realistic, more colourful, subjectively sharper and more engaging than standard dynamic range images”. In its UHD Production Guidelines, the BBC states that HDR “creates an almost 3D effect for viewers”. Research, published in 2022, found that high dynamic range with a broader set of colours is “significantly more immersive” than standard dynamic range. Interestingly, they found “no evidence of significant differences” in immersion between HD and Ultra HD (4k) resolutions.
For more information, visit:
“London’s New Year’s Eve Fireworks in UHD and HDR”, BBC, January 2015. https://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/blog/2015-01-londons-new-years-eve-fireworks-in-ultra-high-definition-and-higher-dynamic-range.
S. J. Hinde, Katy C. Noland, G.A. Thomas, D.R. Bull and I.D. Gilchrest, “On the Immersive Properties of High Dynamic Range Video”, ACM Transactions on Applied Perceptions (TAP), Volume 19, Issue 2, pp. 1-15, July 2022. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3524692.
“UHD Production Guidelines”, BBC. https://www.bbc.co.uk/academy-guides/uhd-production-what-do-i-need-to-know.
In 2026, the core components are in place for photographers to embrace True HDR Photography, which are:
- improved camera sensors (offering excellent dynamic range and low noise), with images captured in RAW format
- new editing and processing capabilities, which allow true HDR images to be easily created, edited and exported
- new, improved image formats, which offer improved colour depths (10-bit or above) compared with the ubiquitous 8-bit JPEG format
- new workflows (enabled by the leadership of companies like Apple and Adobe) to minimise unnecessary work for photographers. These workflows include storage solutions and options for photographers to display and share their images
- HDR-capable displays. True HDR photos can be displayed on a range of compatible devices, including mobile phones, tablets, laptops, desktops and TVs.
Many modern digital cameras offer outstanding dynamic range and low noise performance, making them perfect for True HDR Photography. While the human eye and brain system can respond to incredible dynamic range over time (helped by the iris), instantaneous dynamic range within a single, static glance is around 12 to 14 stops. This dynamic range is now matched by modern cameras.
True HDR photography took a major step forward when editing packages, such as Adobe Camera RAW and Photoshop, began supporting the creation and export of True HDR images. In December 2022, HDR output and display preview capabilities were introduced as a beta feature for macOS and Windows in Camera Raw version 15.1 and Photoshop. The full HDR workflow was officially released across all Lightroom and Camera Raw platforms (desktop and mobile) in October 2023. Finally, HDR display support for Photoshop on macOS and Windows became a standard, non-beta feature in October 2024. From my extensive experience with Adobe Camera RAW and Photoshop, I think Adobe has done a brilliant job with these.
For more information, visit my article:
Navigating HDR Image File Formats from Adobe Camera RAW and Photoshop
New image formats have been developed, which offer the improve colour depths required (10-bit or more) to create, transfer, store and save True HDR images in excellent quality, while minimising file sizes. JPEG XL can already play a major role in any workflow, while AVIF allows sharing in a widespread basis due to excellent browser support.
For more information, visit my article:
Guide to HDR Image Formats: JPEG with Gain Map, JPEX XL, AVIF and HEIC/HEIF
Easy-to-use workflows for photographers used to their traditional workflows are essential. Apple and Adobe are to be congratulated for showing market leadership, helping to underpin straightforward and effective workflows. Apple’s support for lossless and lossy JPEG XL images within its Apple Photos service combined with support for JPEG XL across important applications and devices was a masterstroke.
For more information, visit my article:
What is the Perfect True HDR Photography Workflow?
HDR-compatible display devices have been becoming much more widespread. Many modern mobile phones offer the ability to display HDR images. Many of Apple’s devices are attractive as they (mostly) work seamlessly with its HDR-enabled applications and support the powerful JPEG XL image format.
Apple’s latest iPhone 17, using OLED technology with inky blacks, delivers HDR images with a peak brightness of 1600 nits. Similarly, Apple’s iPad Pro also uses OLED technology with a peak HDR brightness of 1600 nits. While Apple’s MacBook Pro does not offer OLED technology (yet), its implementation of Mini-LED technology is outstanding. Apple’s MacBook Pro also offers a peak brightness of 1600 nits.
Apple’s current weakness is with desktop displays and Apple TV. Apple’s only standalone display is the ageing and expensive 32-inch Pro Display XDR. Using Mini-LED technology that is less advanced than the MacBook Pro (fewer dimming zones), the Pro Display XDR is prone to ghosting – a problem not exhibited by the OLED-based iPhone and iPad Pro, and mostly absent on the MacBook Pro. While Apple TV offers the ability to connect to a huge range of HDR-enabled 4k TVs, it does not currently support the display of HDR images through its Photos app. This is a shame as this would work perfectly with my Panasonic Z95B OLED TV, which offers peak HDR brightness of about 2,200 nits.
Beyond Apple’s display devices, several attractive products have recently been launched. For example, ASUS launched its relatively affordable 32-inch PA32UCDM QD-OLED monitor, capable of 1000 nits peak brightness. Also, True HDR photography enthusiast Greg Benz considers the 32-inch Mini-LED ASUS PA32UCRX (delivering 1600 nit peak brightness) to be the best overall HDR monitor short of Apple’s Pro Display XDR.
For more information, visit:
“ASUS PA32UCRX: The best HDR monitor for photographers?”, Greg Benz website. https://gregbenzphotography.com/hdr-photos/asus-pa32ucxr-the-best-hdr-monitor-for-photographers/.
ASUS PA32UCDM: The best HDR OLED monitor for photographers?”, Greg Benz website. https://gregbenzphotography.com/hdr-photos/asus-pa32ucdm-the-best-hdr-oled-monitor-for-photographers/.
What True HDR Photography isn’t, and that’s the “old” HDR photography
Now we come to a big ‘elephant in the room’, and the reason I have been placing the word “True” in front of the title “HDR Photography”. Judging by Google’s confusing AI descriptions on its search engine, many people are going to get mightily confused by HDR terminology. That is because, historically, the “HDR photography” term has been (and still is) used to refer to a set of photography techniques that are used to dynamically compress scenes so that they can be viewed on conventional displays using the JPEG format. “Old” HDR photography has roots in the 1950s but became very popular in the mid 2000s.
The only aspect that “old” HDR photography and “new” or True HDR Photography have in common is that they both attempt to ‘cope’ better than conventional photography techniques when capturing high dynamic range scenes. However, the reality is that they are complete opposites!
Given the known dynamic range limitations of older cameras, file formats and non-HDR displays, “old” HDR Photography involves using certain techniques to essentially create a dynamically compressed image so as much detail as possible can be retained in the best quality possible (rather than being underexposed, riddled with noise or ‘blown out’). At least initially, a key part of the technique was taking multiple exposures such that highlight areas, mid-tone areas and shadow areas were optimally exposed, to reduce noise. These individual images were then combined, in some ways to create the ‘best of all worlds’, with all parts of the resulting image clear, lacking in noise and well exposed.
True HDR Photography takes an opposite approach to ‘coping’ with high dynamic range scenes and that is to use improved cameras, modern file formats and HDR-capable displays so that photographed scenes can be displayed in their (original) high dynamic range form. The only thing that is “high dynamic range” in “old” HDR Photography is the scene photographed, and not the output of the process itself. In complete contrast, the output of True HDR Photography is a high dynamic range image, like the original scene captured.
Because human vision is used to ‘seeing’ high dynamic range scenes in real life and, because many early adopters were rather overenthusiastic in image processing they used, many early “old” HDR images possessed an artificial, almost surreal, look to them. Also, they tended to look very ‘flat’ dynamically. There was certainly a characteristic HDR ‘look’, which you can see from the example, below.
An example of “old” HDR Photography
In no way do I wish to criticise proponents of “old” HDR photography techniques, as they can produce stunning images, and I feel rather guilty using the term “old”. In a blog article on his website, photographer and Photoshop expert Scott Kelby wrote, “There’s a secret about those ‘over the top’ HDR images that you don’t hear a lot of non-HDR photographers talk about. While many of these photographers don’t like HDR images at all…non-photographers absolutely love them!” Photographers such as Trey Ratcliff and Michael Steighner – to name but two – have made significant impact using “old” HDR Photography techniques.
For more information, visit:
“What They’re Not Telling You About HDR Images”, Scott Kelby Website (June 2010). https://scottkelby.com/the-case-for-hdr.
Trey Ratcliff, Stuck in Customs website. https://stuckincustoms.com.
Michael Steighner, Portfolio website. https://mdsimages.myportfolio.com.
Historically, artists and painters have attempted to capture scenes using low dynamic range canvas lit by candles! It is not surprising that some photographers have become keen on the format as the best images do take on a very appealing artistic quality. Also, dynamic compression is absolutely nothing new. Flat camera profiles provide dynamic compression in still photography and video, and dynamic compression is extensively used in the audio world. For many years, radio broadcasters have dynamically compressed their output (to make it easier to hear in noisy car interiors) and dynamic compression is extensively used even in the production of high-quality audio recordings.
Over the years “old” HDR photography has evolved. Using RAW files with newer cameras, which offer outstanding dynamic range and noise performance has lessened the need for multiple exposures. Also, many photographers have been able to remove the early tell-tale “HDR effect” over the years. So, while proponents no doubt continue with these techniques, the existence of HDR photography terminology for two sets of techniques, which do very different things, is going to create a great deal of confusion, particularly among photographers of a certain age!
Interestingly, many photographers – even those vehemently opposed to “old” HDR Photography – have been using similar techniques whether they realise it or not. Typically, when editing a RAW file taken of a high dynamic range scene, photographers will often be initially faced with blown-out skies or darkened highlights shown on the ‘histogram’ and will adjust sliders – such as “Highlights”, “Whites” and “Shadows” – to brighten shadow areas and ‘recover’ blue skies. I am sure that many photographers have discovered that, if these adjustments are pushed too far, resultant images take on that artificial “old” HDR look. So, that’s enough of “old” HDR Photography!
Subjects and scenes that are particularly suited to True HDR Photography
For many photographers, the urgency to move to True HDR workflows will depend on the subjects they typically capture. There is no doubt that some subjects strongly suit the True HDR treatment and some do not (discussed in the next section). To help, I have produced the following presentation (using Apple’s HDR-enabled Keynote).
In it, I demonstrate (with example True HDR images) that the following subjects work particularly well with True HDR treatment:
- metals, such as gold, which glisten due to specular highlights
- stained-glass windows, as colours appear very intense in real life
- night-time scenes, with intense white or coloured lights set against a dark backdrop
- interiors of cathedrals and churches, where intense light through colourful stained-glass windows goes hand-in-hand with dark interior details
- fireworks, where intense whites and colours provide the ‘wow’ factor against an inky sky
- skies, avoiding the bleached or ‘blown out’ effect experienced with conventional photography, struggles to capture the true intensity of skies
- flowers, which are often bleached out due to being lit directly by the sun
- wildlife, making images appear sharper and more lifelike.
Subjects and scenes that can be problematic for True HDR
Earlier adoption and viewing experience of HDR in video and films have helped flag up potential issues with using True HDR. Extensive experience with True HDR Photography has flagged up several potential challenges, particularly if applying True HDR to every scene photographed.
Photographers well know that bright parts of an image (and strong colours) attract the eye’s attention. This may be great when those parts are the intended subject, for example bright lights in a night-time scene, fireworks or intense stained-glass windows. However, overly bright or colourful highlights that are essentially visual distractions can be problematic. With conventional standard dynamic range images, peak brightness limits will reduce the effect of bright distractions, for example, a portrait with the sun coming through a window behind the subject. With HDR, such positioning may ruin the image. Lighting becomes much more important with HDR.
I’ve lost count of the HDR films that I’ve seen with indoor scenes with bright light streaming in from windows while subjects look dark and unlit in the shadows. In part, this has been due to an over enthusiastic desire to demonstrate an “HDR effect”. I’ve noticed, in my own processing, that subjects competing with bright lights (for example, from windows or artificial lighting) tend to appear darker than with conventional photography. Selective brightening of a subject (Adobe’s AI masking tools in Adobe Camera RAW are wonderful for this) or the use of dedicated subject lighting can be very valuable.
Non-uniform lighting can be very challenging. Looking at many sunsets and sunrises I have captured, I have sometimes been immediately disappointed when selecting the ‘HDR’ option in Adobe Camera RAW. A sunset across the sky may reveal huge differences in colour intensity in different parts of the sky, and the brightest parts may become major visual distractions. Reframing can often by beneficial or adjustment (for example, masking the sky using Adobe Camera’s RAW excellent sky masking tool) to reduce contrast levels.
Artificial backlighting for portraits (where the intention is to take photos against a fully white backdrop) can yield terrible results with True HDR. That supposed uniformly white background will usually be found to be utterly non uniform in True HDR, with the brightest parts becoming visual distractions. True HDR portrait photography may require very different approaches to framing and lighting.
The final problem area is not one about a particular subject, but more about the overall approach with True HDR Photography. True HDR Photography should be about increased dynamic range rather than enhanced overall brightness. It is, unfortunately, possible to adjust images to show substantially higher overall brightness but with reduced dynamic range! True HDR photography allows you to brighten all parts of an image, so that images stand out from others due to their overall brightness.
I am sure that advertisers are going to quickly see that creating ads that are brighter and more colourful than other ads will receive more attention. So, we may see a race towards brighter (and brighter) images, so much so that viewers will become tired of the format and want the HDR effect to be switched off. This would be a crying shame. My prediction is that, once true-HDR becomes prolific on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Instagram, they will be dominated with bright HDR ads.
It’s vital that photographers worry less about standing out from others as if it was a brightness competition and focus on using the new True HDR Photography toolbox to create the best image possible that tells the story they want to tell. In the True HDR Photography world, there will be definite advantages from having your own ad-free website or using sharing platforms without ads. With HDR ads, those ads are going to become even more annoying and distracting!
Gain Maps can be important for compatibility, although compatibility comes at a cost and Gain Maps may not always be needed
One potentially problematic aspect of True HDR photography is sharing images with others using a single image file when you may have some users with HDR-compatible devices and others who do not, for example. An image on a website page is an example.
Gain Maps are an important way of ensuring those without compatible devices still see a good image (which the photographer intended). Gain maps are embedded alongside a single HDR or non-HDR base image and instruct the display device/browser how to construct the HDR image (from a non-HDR base image) or SDR image (from an HDR base image).
Gain Maps are easily produced with Adobe Camera RAW, although Instagram requires a plugin developed by Greg Benz.
Gain Maps always make image files larger in size. I think they only should be used if you really need them. For example, if you are only wanting to display images on your own HDR-compatible devices or share them with a limited number of people (e.g. family members) with compatible devices, Gain Maps are not necessary.
If you don’t really care about the quality of the non-HDR image, Gain Maps are not necessary.
If you are creating images for archiving, for example ‘master’ post-edit JPEG XL files, which may be processed (later) for widespread sharing, Gain Maps are not necessary. Gain Maps can be added later when creating compressed images for sharing (If deemed necessary).
My issue with Gain Maps is that they are degrading the experience for those with HDR-capable devices (with larger file sizes than needed) while not actually producing an optimum image for non-capable devices.
In many cases, there may be effective workarounds. For example, I already have an extensive portfolio of non-HDR images on SmugMug, which are optimised for non-HDR display. Rather than throwing these away and create Gain-Mapped HDR images, I think it is better to keep these in a clearly defined area for non-HDR devices and then create separate image galleries specifically for compatible HDR devices. This approach allows non-HDR images to be accessed in the best possible quality, while HDR images can be accessed with the best possible quality also. Any reduction in file size from not including a Gain Map could go to reduce image compression of the HDR image, maximising image quality, or just make the HDR file load quicker.
Perhaps the biggest advantage of True HDR Photography is that you can bring old RAW files to life
Often when you purchase new photography gear, such as a new camera or lens, you only benefit all the photos you take after the purchase. The great advantage of True HDR Photography is that you can re-process/edit all your stored RAW files to create new HDR images.
This is like the film studios re-mastering past 35mm blockbuster films to create HDR versions.
My current favourite activity is working through my old family photos (stored in RAW format since 2006) and bringing new life to them. I have been amazed at how good those old RAW files look, even from nearly 20 years ago. Seeing family and friends looking much more lifelike (some of whom are no longer with us) has been emotional and highly satisfying.
I wish you well on your own personal True HDR Photography journey.