HDR Sunset

canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
edited November 24, 2008 in Landscapes
I took this sunset shot and processed it through HDR which I have recently obtained. Comments and advice would be most appreciated.
Regards
Bob

419853206_krzz5-L.jpg

Comments

  • CatoCato Registered Users Posts: 287 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    canon400d wrote:
    I took this sunset shot and processed it through HDR which I have recently obtained. Comments and advice would be most appreciated.
    Regards
    Bob

    I'm not seeing a photo... headscratch.gif
    http://catographer.smugmug.com/

    Shooter on a shoestring.
  • Antonio CorreiaAntonio Correia Registered Users Posts: 6,241 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    Neither am I ...ne_nau.gif
    All the best ! ... António Correia - Facebook
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    Antonio Correia wrote:
    Neither am I ...ne_nau.gif

    Oooooops I sincerely apologise Cato and Antonio. This HDR must be getting to me. Thanks for taking the time to look.
    Regards
    Bob
  • GOLDENORFEGOLDENORFE Super Moderators Posts: 4,747 moderator
    edited November 18, 2008
    i can see it now!
    great colour Bob.
    looks like a lot of noise in dark foreground. is it in the original ?
    phil
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/goldenorfe/
    Phil

    moderator - Holy Macro
    Goldenorfe’s Flickr Gallery
    Goldenorfe photography on Smugmug
    Phils Photographic Adventures Blog
  • Antonio CorreiaAntonio Correia Registered Users Posts: 6,241 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    Advice Bob ... I can't give you as I am a total ignorant on that way to work the pictures, but about the photo...

    I think it is too red. HDR, as far as I have seen, enlarges the color range and your photo is almost totally red/orange.

    Please try again. :D
    Maybe you could get some detail in the dark area of the picture...ne_nau.gif

    thumb.gif
    All the best ! ... António Correia - Facebook
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    GOLDENORFE wrote:
    i can see it now!
    great colour Bob.
    looks like a lot of noise in dark foreground. is it in the original ?
    phil
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/goldenorfe/

    The foreground was extremely dark so I thought I would give it a brush over with the dodge and burn tool to show the heather. I should have probably left it Phil.
    Regards
    Bob
  • leaforteleaforte Registered Users Posts: 1,948 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    Looks like cranberry bogs in the foreground.
    Growing with Dgrin



  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    canon400d wrote:
    The foreground was extremely dark so I thought I would give it a brush over with the dodge and burn tool to show the heather. I should have probably left it Phil.
    Regards
    Bob

    Yes I would agree Antonio HDR does bring out the colour and I would agree it is over the top with the red and orange. With regard to the foreground it was really dark and I thought I would lighten it with the dodge/burn tool as I explained to Phil.
    I will try again and see what happens as I still have the raw file. Thanks for looking and advice given.
    Regards
    Bob
  • pyrypyry Registered Users Posts: 1,733 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    That must have been a glorious sunset to look at, but I'm afraid the photo doesn't do it justice, you've over cooked the highlights and the foregrounds are filled with noise - I leaning to think that one of your originals might have done a better job on it's own.

    As for the HDR you would probably have needed more exposures - this is the kind of scene that has the widest possible dynamic range. How many shots and what bracketing did you use?
    Creativity's hard.

    http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    pyry wrote:
    That must have been a glorious sunset to look at, but I'm afraid the photo doesn't do it justice, you've over cooked the highlights and the foregrounds are filled with noise - I leaning to think that one of your originals might have done a better job on it's own.

    As for the HDR you would probably have needed more exposures - this is the kind of scene that has the widest possible dynamic range. How many shots and what bracketing did you use?

    Hey, I used a 40D with it on AEB, RAW on continuous 1 stop[ over and one stop under and that was the best I could do, I have had another go through HDR and I cannot seem to get it any better even tweaking it on CS3. If anyone can do any better go ahead by all means and see what can be done. Here is my second attempt:-

    419990780_Vu4pq-L.jpg
  • pyrypyry Registered Users Posts: 1,733 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    canon400d wrote:
    Hey, I used a 40D with it on AEB, RAW on continuous 1 stop[ over and one stop under and that was the best I could do, I have had another go through HDR and I cannot seem to get it any better even tweaking it on CS3. If anyone can do any better go ahead by all means and see what can be done. Here is my second attempt:-

    The highlights are still clipped - you may need to cheat a bit with a split toner..

    You'd need to make a series considerably wider than +-1 to make that work in HDR conversion - the highlights here are as bright as they get. I'd check the metering with aperture priority and low ISO and then start on manual from there. Go more positive one stop at a time until there's enough light in foreground and then start doing the negatives until the sun is barely clipped - that might mean a dozen exposures. That should give you all the data you'd ever need to make a good HDR and you can select the exposures you need in post.

    I'll have to say I'm making educated guesses here on HDR though, I've only tried a few and they weren't better than the best single exposure...
    Creativity's hard.

    http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    pyry wrote:
    The highlights are still clipped - you may need to cheat a bit with a split toner..

    You'd need to make a series considerably wider than +-1 to make that work in HDR conversion - the highlights here are as bright as they get. I'd check the metering with aperture priority and low ISO and then start on manual from there. Go more positive one stop at a time until there's enough light in foreground and then start doing the negatives until the sun is barely clipped - that might mean a dozen exposures. That should give you all the data you'd ever need to make a good HDR and you can select the exposures you need in post.

    I'll have to say I'm making educated guesses here on HDR though, I've only tried a few and they weren't better than the best single exposure...

    Thanks Pyry, I am a wee bit lost here because using HDR with AEB with the shutter release which is recommended. Correct me as I am of the opinion I can only get three continuous shots. Should I have gone 2 stops over and 2 stops under. I was going off the tutorial that Pillman had in his post on this thread and a previous thread. How would I go about getting 12 exposures on AEB. I am totally new to HDR and I have gone for Photomatrix which is supposed to be the best. Hope I haven't confused you.
    Regards
    Bob
  • pyrypyry Registered Users Posts: 1,733 Major grins
    edited November 18, 2008
    canon400d wrote:
    How would I go about getting 12 exposures on AEB. I am totally new to HDR and I have gone for Photomatrix which is supposed to be the best. Hope I haven't confused you.

    Canons only give you 3 exposures with AEB. To make more, you have to bracket by hand in M mode. Start at a setting and change the exposure between shots. There are also some computer programs that can run custom sets of exposures by controlling the camera through USB.

    You can also use AEB to get more than 3 if you combine it with compensation, for example:
    AEB at +-1: shoot at -2 and +1: you get -3 to +2.
    AEB at +-2: shoot at -2, -1: you get -4 to +1 - and you can add a +-1 at +2 for eight different exposures from -4 to +3.
    Creativity's hard.

    http://pyryekholm.kuvat.fi/
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 19, 2008
    pyry wrote:
    Canons only give you 3 exposures with AEB. To make more, you have to bracket by hand in M mode. Start at a setting and change the exposure between shots. There are also some computer programs that can run custom sets of exposures by controlling the camera through USB.

    You can also use AEB to get more than 3 if you combine it with compensation, for example:
    AEB at +-1: shoot at -2 and +1: you get -3 to +2.
    AEB at +-2: shoot at -2, -1: you get -4 to +1 - and you can add a +-1 at +2 for eight different exposures from -4 to +3.

    Thanks ever so much for that Pyry very useful indeed as I never knew any of the settings you have referred to.
    Regard
    Bob
  • BeachBillBeachBill Registered Users Posts: 1,311 Major grins
    edited November 20, 2008
    canon400d wrote:
    I am a wee bit lost here because using HDR with AEB with the shutter release which is recommended. Correct me as I am of the opinion I can only get three continuous shots. Should I have gone 2 stops over and 2 stops under.

    The more exposures the better, however if you are only going to do three shots with AEB, then +/-2 are recommended. +/-1 wouldn't give enough range which is why you decided to dodge the foreground to make it brighter.

    Here is the tutorial from the folks that bring us Photomatix:
    http://www.hdrsoft.com/resources/tut_mac/part1.html
    Bill Gerrard Photography - Facebook - Interview - SmugRoom: Useful Tools for SmugMug
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 21, 2008
    BeachBill wrote:
    The more exposures the better, however if you are only going to do three shots with AEB, then +/-2 are recommended. +/-1 wouldn't give enough range which is why you decided to dodge the foreground to make it brighter.

    Here is the tutorial from the folks that bring us Photomatix:
    http://www.hdrsoft.com/resources/tut_mac/part1.html

    Thanks ever so much Bill for looking and advising me. In future I will always use +/-2 in future.
    Regards
    Bob
  • stevesierenstevesieren Registered Users Posts: 39 Big grins
    edited November 21, 2008
    HDRing
    Bob, The repost looks much better, quality wise. On top of using +2 & -2 for a scene like this you could use an nuetral density grad filter. The results will come out even better.
  • 00dahc00dahc Registered Users Posts: 19 Big grins
    edited November 21, 2008
    Holy noise! I guess we'd have to hear more on what you did to get that picture before giving advice.
    Canon 40D | Canon 20D | 70-200 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/2.8L II | 135 f/2L | 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS | 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 50 EX f/2.8 Macro

    retardstrength.net
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 21, 2008
    00dahc wrote:
    Holy noise! I guess we'd have to hear more on what you did to get that picture before giving advice.

    I think I know where I have gone wrong I should have used AV mode and also used +/-2 rather than +/-1 I will have another go when I eagerly await the next sunset. If you can give me any more advice it will be more than welcomed as I am still learning HDR and Photomatrix.
    Regards
    Bob
  • 00dahc00dahc Registered Users Posts: 19 Big grins
    edited November 24, 2008
    canon400d wrote:
    I think I know where I have gone wrong I should have used AV mode and also used +/-2 rather than +/-1 I will have another go when I eagerly await the next sunset. If you can give me any more advice it will be more than welcomed as I am still learning HDR and Photomatrix.
    Regards
    Bob

    Sounds like you have it wrapped up. We're all learning. Didn't mean to sound belittling with my first comment,if I did.

    Looking forward to your next crack at it!
    Canon 40D | Canon 20D | 70-200 f/4L IS | 16-35 f/2.8L II | 135 f/2L | 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS | 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 50 EX f/2.8 Macro

    retardstrength.net
  • canon400dcanon400d Banned Posts: 2,826 Major grins
    edited November 24, 2008
    00dahc wrote:
    Sounds like you have it wrapped up. We're all learning. Didn't mean to sound belittling with my first comment,if I did.

    Looking forward to your next crack at it!

    I couldn't agree more. I really made a bad job of this one that is for sure.
    Bob
  • anonymouscubananonymouscuban Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 4,586 Major grins
    edited November 24, 2008
    Bob,

    I'm no HDR expert but I have dabbled in it a bit. I too have ran across images where there is a lot of noise added post-HDR. It has to do with the blacks clipping. Someone suggested taking more exposures... that's the way to go.

    What you want to do is to check the historgram on your most underexposed and most overexposed image. If the either end is clipped, then you need to take additional exposures.

    For a scene like that, a bracket of 9 exposures at 1 EV between should do the trick. When you go to run the HDR, you don't necessarily need to use all the exposures. You can use 1 over that captures the most shadow details, the metered shot, and then 1 under that captures all the highlights with the least amount of clipping.

    You may still have to clean it up in PS afterwards by layer one of the shots and masking in any blown details. Also, check your images before you HDR. You may have noise in the originals which should be cleaned up before you use them in the HDR process.

    Lastly, if you are autobracketing, make certain you are in aperature priority and not Program or Auto mode. It's important that your aperature remain constant throughout all the shots or the different DOF's will reduce the sharpness of the end result.
    "I'm not yelling. I'm Cuban. That's how we talk."

    Moderator of the People and Go Figure forums

    My Smug Site
Sign In or Register to comment.