This may need only a simple explanation. I am wondering if there is anything particular done in post-processing that gives this image such deep, contrasty, sharpness or whatever might be going on?

Perhaps the final image here is less about PP and much more about the lighting of the scene when it was taken.

Looks like HDR to me.

Dpic_arctic wrote:
Looks like HDR to me.

Yeah, I wondered that too. Especially given the consistency in exposure between indoors and outdoors.

Lots of midtone contrast/sharpening, as evident in the "haloing", I would also guess that the inside, and outside for that matter, were brighter in the original shot. A more accurate guess would be that outside scene has been composited in.

Use the Talent key...

this really looks like an HDR. it would have to be very unusual lighting or very subtle fill lights to look like that otherwise. the haloing more or less nails it though.

Herb...

This screams HDR. Like some others have said, the halos show this is HDR and not just lighting.

+1-minimal hdr/tonal contrast.

Would someone mind pointing out the halos they are seeing. I don't see any.

deadbolt wrote:
Would someone mind pointing out the halos they are seeing. I don't see any.

Around the inside edges of the window panes and a little around the leaves hanging on the window also. That's what I see anyway.

This one could result from a careful exposure at the moment of capture, with later combining of two edits, one for outdoors and one for inside.

I've yet to learn how to combine two edits of the same image without that halo (or what I call flaring, as here). Maybe the editor of this image had the same problem.

This image may've been manipulated in an image-editor, too, for opening shadows and enhancing the brightness of the floor. I notice now that the flooring to the left appears too bright if lighted only via the window opening.

I tend not to lean to the opinion of HDR processing owing to the noisy clouds and too much blue in them, to me a sign instead of normal exposure capture.

From painful experience on FM, I caution offering opinions as to tonality, sharpness, or contrast which extrapolate from the Web version of the original image. The two versions may differ substantially.

Josh S wrote:
Perhaps the final image here is less about PP and much more about the lighting of the scene when it was taken.
+1

I think folks are working too hard here with observations about HDR and "haloing". I downloaded the file and zoomed in. All I see is a well done photo with light and shadows one would expect from a scene like this with judicious sharpening. If the light on the floor at the left appears too bright, perhaps it is because there is a window on the wall at the left. The straight lines at the edge suggest perhaps a tilt-shift lens was used, perhaps the Canon 24, though we all know how to adjust such things in post-processing, if necessary.

I see a well taken photo with pretty normal post processing, at least normal if one is using something like Lightroom followed by a bit of work in Photoshop.

CGrindahl: Agree with your opinion.

Beautiful photo, and I believe the etiquette here is that you should not post someone else's photo (do you have permission?) but a link to that photo. Here everyone is commenting on this shot and we don't even know whose it is.

there is obvious haloing that would not appear if processed as you described. the most obvious ones are around the leaves in the upper right pane of the window.

Herb...

CGrindahl wrote:
I see a well taken photo with pretty normal post processing, at least normal if one is using something like Lightroom followed by a bit of work in Photoshop.

HerbChong wrote:
there is obvious haloing that would not appear if processed as you described. the most obvious ones are around the leaves in the upper right pane of the window.

Herb...

CGrindahl wrote:
I see a well taken photo with pretty normal post processing, at least normal if one is using something like Lightroom followed by a bit of work in Photoshop.


And what you see could also be explained by variation in the clouds/sky conditions in the distance. It could also be a product of sharpening. As I said, this whole analysis is strained. Someone needs to find the photographer and ASK.