Okay I know this is a subjective question. But when is HDR too overdone? HDR is this: http://bit.ly/38CrEV When HDR first hit me about 5 years ago my jaw dropped. My first thought was the dynamic range of these photos looks like my own eyeballs rendition! But then, I like others started playing with it and some of us (photographers) went or still do go pretty far with that look of heavy unreal shadow detail, greyish cast, subdued colors, and to say the least a little noise. I've said this before, HDR became a tool in my bag of photography, not the terminus for the image. HDR for me is not an entire category, instead I like to think of it as just a part of creating a good image. I don't know if there is backlash for the people who are not photographers (and know what HDR is), but I can speak from print selling experience that clients like the idea of HDR and they like images that strangely enough had great dynamic range even before it was baked into HDR. The images that you can easily piece together in PS or Lightroom. You know the photos, taken in that correct light for regular photography, but instead you decided to bracket and bake. These images actually have some more "believeabilty" to them than the ones that have a E.V. of 9+ People want to trust that image in order for them to like it and allow it into their heart. Just my opinion.