HDRs?

Kilo

In using HDR photo editors, such as Photomatix or Photo Studio, can anything be done with a single photo, or do you actually have to have three or more?

I'm not one who can just stand there and take one normal shot, then an over-exposed shot, and then an under-exposed one,`cos not everything, such as clouds, birds, wind blowing a flower, sun setting, is gonna be exactly in the same spot.

If HDRs are for multible shots only – of the same thing in the same spot, (no movement of objects whatsoever), then I guess this isn't a program for me... at least not yet.

pathfinder

Kilo,

Put your camera in AEB ( auto bracketing mode to shoot normal, -2 EV, +2 Ev ) and the camera in Av mode, and it will shoot three frames in rapid succession ( changing the shutter speed only ) that are usually suitable for making an HDR. Just make sure your slowest shutter speed is at least 1/60th or so. Don't let you shutter speed drop down to 1/15th.

Not always as good as a a series shot form a tripod, but lots of HDRs are shot this way.

Keep you initial shutter speed at least 1/125th, because 2 stops slower is going to be 1/30th at the same aperture.

Now you will have your three frames needed for HDR.

If you shoot RAW, some folks make three separate frames from a single RAW file to use for HDR.

You can also get an HDR look with some actions and software without real HDR images as well.

kdog

pathfinder wrote:

If you shoot RAW, some folks make three separate frames from a single RAW file to use for HDR.

Photomatix actually makes things much easier than that. It allows you to import and tone map a single RAW image.

Here's one I just did that way. Single RAW image imported directly into Photomatix, tone mapped, and finished in Photoshop.


Here's the original processed completely in Photoshop the conventional way.


Cheers,
-joel

anonymouscuban

Joel,

What was your workflow in PS after you tone mapped?

I have the tone mapping part down pretty good now in Photomatix. I understand pretty well how all the sliders work and how to get a nice image. However, I have yet to really do any post-HDR work in PS.

kdog

anonymouscuban wrote:

Joel,

What was your workflow in PS after you tone mapped?

Levels and Curves is the main thing. HDRs tend to compress much of the image into the midtones making the image look flat. Where people go wrong I feel is trying to get the image to pop in the HDR tool. Leave it flat in the HDR tool, then use curves to get your contrast back in PS. Then it's pretty much do whatever other post-processing you like, a little sharpening, and you're good to go. I used a mild standard S curve in that shot.

Cheers,
-joel

anonymouscuban

Thanks. This should help me to get more realistic looking tone mapped images. Although for some pics, the surreal look is fun.

Kilo

kdog wrote:

Photomatix actually makes things much easier than that. It allows you to import and tone map a single RAW image.

Here's one I just did that way. Single RAW image imported directly into Photomatix, tone mapped, and finished in Photoshop.


Here's the original processed completely in Photoshop the conventional way.


Cheers,
-joel

Wow, what a difference in the sky. Do HDRs do well for portraits, or are they just designed for landscapes?

kdog

Kilo wrote:

Wow, what a difference in the sky. Do HDRs do well for portraits, or are they just designed for landscapes?

Define "well". I've seen some really cool portraits done in HDR as a special effect. But for realistic portraits, one would have to ask "why?". The whole idea of portraits is to control the lighting so you get your best shot, right?

Here's an HDR of a closeup shot of a coyote that I was fortunate to get. He was in direct light and the exposure was really messed up. Turning into an HDR basically saved it. The colors are exaggerated, but what the heck.

Professional

I have a HDR shot of the falcon [or called Saqr in my country] kind of a Prey, truly amazing shot, you will get amazed of it, but maybe it seems here people don't really get amazed with HDR shots, mostly of what i did.

Kilo

Professional wrote:

I have a HDR shot of the falcon [or called Saqr in my country] kind of a Prey, truly amazing shot, you will get amazed of it, but maybe it seems here people don't really get amazed with HDR shots, mostly of what i did.

You ought'a post them. Not everyone thinks their own pictures are good. I don't like most of mine. I like everyone else's.

anonymouscuban

Professional wrote:

I have a HDR shot of the falcon [or called Saqr in my country] kind of a Prey, truly amazing shot, you will get amazed of it, but maybe it seems here people don't really get amazed with HDR shots, mostly of what i did.

Pro... I happen to like a lot of the images you have recently posted. You're not going to please everyone and there are many that have a real hate for HDR. You have posted images that are surreal but you have also posted images that look natural, which shows you are not just tone mapping the crap out of every image.

Let's face it, HDR is not for everyone. I will be honest, I think it has been really overdone on the interwebs. However, I still find that I can appreciate a really cool tone mapped image. For those that don't, maybe they shouldn't look at them.

Professional

OK, here:

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=1083848#post1083848

Kilo

Professional wrote:

OK, here:

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?p=1083848#post1083848

They look really good to me.

Kilo

kdog wrote:

Define "well". I've seen some really cool portraits done in HDR as a special effect. But for realistic portraits, one would have to ask "why?". The whole idea of portraits is to control the lighting so you get your best shot, right?

Here's an HDR of a closeup shot of a coyote that I was fortunate to get. He was in direct light and the exposure was really messed up. Turning into an HDR basically saved it. The colors are exaggerated, but what the heck.

I downloaded Photomatix. I can only seem to do an okay job, (nothing like you or the others who use it), with the skies. Anything else, such as portraits or flower close-ups, come out with no difference than the originals.