High Dynamic Range

Picturesofthelowcountry

Picturesofthelowcountry

I would like to talk about this subject with others; I am new to HDR and would like to get some tips from someone that has a little more experience.

Thanks MIke

pathfinder

HDR can be quite fun and visually entertaining.

Unless you can convince me that there are three different images in your recent posts, I am going to temporarily delete the first two threads. One post of this image requesting discussion seems sufficient.


I use Photomatix Pro and CS4. I create my HDR files in CS4 and then drop them into Photomatix for Tone Mapping. I tend to prefer images that are hard to be certain were shot as HDR images, rather than the haloed variety that seems popular on the Web.

I like your image, with the lovely detail in the grass. I find the grass far more interesting than the sky. I think I might crop most of the sky in the first grey, just above the pink light in the sky. I don't find the grey tones that compelling in the sky. Maybe they need more contrast in the top of the sky. I don't like the way the horizon bisects your image. Less sky and more grass and water might work better for me.

dlplumer

OK, tell us what software you used, how many images you merged and the EXIF data etc.

I can tell you that image looks pretty good, although it is posted too large. The foreground is a bit soft for my taste, but the HDR processing looks good.

Tell us how you did it and what specifically you would like feedback on.

Dan

Nikolai

Nice image (albeit highlights are still blown out)

IMHO:
"Conventional HDR" (tone mapping) seems to work best when dealing with highly detailed pictures with very complex lighting pattern (e.g. inside a cathedral).
More natural, simplistic case (e.g. sunset, like yours) are best approached by simply compositing a few layers (with bracketed exposures adjusted in RAW module) and proper masking/blending.
That is, of course, if you, like yours truly, strive for natural look. But if the typical HDR halos are essential for your goal - tone map away!

Picturesofthelowcountry

First to Pathfinder, The reason for the second post was that I only got one response from the first. I wouldn’t really know how to prove to you that I used three separate images, other than say I import into lightroom and use the Photomatix Plug-in and tone map from there. I bought the software about a week ago so I’m not that familiar with it yet. As far as all the feedback on my picture I really do appreciate it and see your point. The haloed shots have their place but the natural look does it for me as well.

To DLplumer, I am not sure how to get the exif info on the picture, is there a way I can pull from Lightroom? As far as the size that was just an option that I clicked. As I mentioned I have had this software for about a week and I would like to talk to people about what they do and at the same time get a little feedback on what I do.
Well with all that said, thanks for the feedback and have a great night and day tomorrow!

Mike
This is about as far as i would take it from a natural state if i had a place to use it or unless a client requested it.

Picturesofthelowcountry

Nikolai wrote:

Nice image (albeit highlights are still blown out)

IMHO:
"Conventional HDR" (tone mapping) seems to work best when dealing with highly detailed pictures with very complex lighting pattern (e.g. inside a cathedral).
More natural, simplistic case (e.g. sunset, like yours) are best approached by simply compositing a few layers (with bracketed exposures adjusted in RAW module) and proper masking/blending.
That is, of course, if you, like yours truly, strive for natural look. But if the typical HDR halos are essential for your goal - tone map away!

Thanks, I have a great backyard to take pictures of this was taken fronm my condo balcony, i apreciate your feedback