As the image you displayed below in your follow up post shows, HDR and the resultant tone mapping does not have to lead to an “artificial” looking or “stylized” image but can in fact lead to an even more realistic one. (very nice image by the by, ((we won't touch on the subject matter hopefully images of same aren't taboo! )) ).
Since the way we perceive a dynamic image with our eyes constantly adjusting to changes in shadow and light can not be captured in a static image of the same scene HDR is nothing more an attempt to bridge that gap.
I guess its a reaction to such comments as that made by that crazydrummercrimial dude and just feel HDR or the process of trying bring together a set of images that come closer to what the human eye sees has gotten a "bad rap".
See, its all that crazy drummers fault!
HDR is like Auto-tune... used properly it makes things better without being overly noticeable.
Misused and well it grates on your senses... of course some people really like both. Have you heard what passes for music these days!
1995 K75 (traded to a good home)
1985 Rockwell International B-1B
Yeah, like when digital first came out and many holdouts cried that it was "cheating" and unworthy of being called photography!
(saddly I was among them, at least in part, and held on to film till around 2000, "ain't nothin' out there better than my trusty ol' Nikon F !" or so I thought at the time! Ha Ha!)
Its all good.....
Not a HDR shot, but it looks about as cold as it felt with the black Tron-like effects.