Erik Reinhard can truly be called the Godfather of tonemapping. Not only did he develop some of the most successful tonemapping algorithms, he also inspired numerous software makers by writing the book that is considered the HDRI-bible:
"High Dynamic Range Imaging: Acquisition, Display and Image-Based Lighting". This technically detailed book laid the groundwork for almost every HDRI software we have today. For example, Photomatix's Tone Compressor as well as Picturenaut's Photoreceptor are based on his code, Artizen and QTpfsGUI have some tonemappers named after him.
In other words, Erik Reinhard knows a great deal about tonemapping. It's his baby.
My own take on tonemapping Reinhard's example HDRI. Done by blending Photoreceptor (Picturenaut) with Details Enhancer (Photomatix) and some post adjustments in Photoshop.
And it bothers him that the three letters HDR are often associated with a certain look. There is no such thing as an "HDR look", and if you read my
Handbook you should be well aware of this fact.
HDRI is a tool, not a particular look (page 168 to 170). Nevertheless, surreal and impressionist images, that happen to be made from HDR images via excessive tonemapping, are calling lots of attention on flickr. I wouldn't go as far as naming these images "wrong" (although it is definitely wrong to still
call them HDR). It's a matter of taste, and people without taste make tasteless images. That simple. It's always been like that, way before the advent of HDR imaging. The dangerous part comes in, when a particular tasteless use of a tool is getting so much spotlight, that it starts to become synonymous of what you can do with this tool. Dangerous, because it makes HDR look like a toy, whereas it really is a seriously powerful tool for making better quality images.
So that was my comment on
Reinhard's comment on Flickr. Feel free to comment in this.