2006 Dgrin Post Shoot Out HDR

Skippy

Ahhhhh better late than never I guess :rolleyes
I tried my hand at HDR tonight and decided to give this shot from last year a try.

The orginal images are very dark, not very colourful, and lack detail.

These 2 picture consists of 17 images each, they are in fact the same shot edited 17 times.

Hope you like them....... I believe these are from Canyon Lands.
Someone will correct me if I'm wrong

Enjoy..........Skippy
.





.

kkart

Like it? I love it personally! 17 images...sheesh....the light and contrast in this is just stunning, I would say it came out nothing short of perfect!

Skippy

kkart wrote:

Like it? I love it personally! 17 images...sheesh....the light and contrast in this is just stunning, I would say it came out nothing short of perfect!

I am just learning how to do HDR, this is only the second shot I've done, I'm pleased with the results, but hopefully I will get better at it as I learn more.

Thank you for your very kind words ... Skippy
.

Eric&Susan

When done right HDR looks great and you've done these just right.

Looking good

Eric

Art Scott

These are just absolutle AWESOMEthumbclapbow

thebigsky

They're excellent Skippy, well done, that tree looks like it's going to pop out of the screen, fantastic HDR, best I've seen.

Charlie

Seamus

the pics are fantastic Skippy, would you mind giving a brief run down on how you do this?

thanks,

davidryan

Skippy these are wonderful. I have tried HDR several times but I am so ashamed of the outcome-- guess I had better keep practicing.

ericgtr

Excellent examples of the power of HDR, nicely done.

Skippy

Thanks everyone.

I downloaded PhotoMatrixPro, the Demo version to do these shots.

Now what your suppose to do is have multiple shots taken at different exposures then use this program to combine them.

It's totally up to you how many images you use.

However I didn't have multiple exposures, so what I did was try to make out I did by taking one image and altering the exposure 17 times as if I had taken 17 photos.

So if they were real shots each would have been different.
With EV's of -2.00 all the way through to +2.00

So you'd have a bunch of photo's taken at EV's like this
-2.00/-1.75/-1.50/-1.25/-1.00/-0.75/-0.50/-0.25/
0.00/+0.25/+0.50/+0.75/+1.00/+1.25/+1.50/+1.75/+2.00

After you merge them within the program, you can then also alter the image using the same program, till you get what you think looks okay

Then you can take that image over to your photo editing program and edit it some more.

Please note in my shots that I have done so far they have been shots that have already been re-processed.

You will get a far better result if you use Original images at multiple exposures, and not the ONE image altered multiple times as I did.

However using this process on a SINGLE image can yeild you a very nice image as well

Sorry folks but I'm one of those non technical people, hope this explains what I did........ get yourself that demo version of PHOTOMATRIX.

Remember the demo version will put water marks all through your image, I just edited them back out .... Skippy
.

JillG

These are wonderful clapI've been thinking about HDR recently. thank you so much for your explaination... Never thought I could use an old pic.:D
Jill

ChrisJ

Very nice, Skippy!

Fred W

Picture perfect.......great job Skippy.

eoren1

Hey Skippy,
Just so you know, PhotomatixPro will also let you play around with a single image if you shot it in RAW mode. Just convert it to a 16 bit tiff and open in the program. See what you get from these and if it can save you the trouble of converting to all of the different exposed versions of the single image.
E

ps - awesome work on the above!

donek

I'd be interested to see what you started with. The image as it was originally exposed.

USAIR

Very cool Skippy goos job

Fred

hawkeye978

Did you start with a single RAW image to generate the 17 exposures? I thought the only way you can get that kind of contrast enhancement from one pictures is to start with RAW. I think it's because the RAW image already has a larger bit size (24-bit??) so you have more room to work in.

Skippy

hawkeye978 wrote:

Did you start with a single RAW image to generate the 17 exposures? I thought the only way you can get that kind of contrast enhancement from one pictures is to start with RAW. I think it's because the RAW image already has a larger bit size (24-bit??) so you have more room to work in.

This image was orginally a TIFF, what I did was open it in a PhotoShop, and alter the Exposure and save it each time as a jpeg.
So what I ended up with was 17 jpegs.

Cause reading just doesn't do it for me, I'm one of those people that learns from doing things.

So I figured if I converted the image to cover the entire scale from -2.00 all the way up to +2.00 I should have a bit to play with

Eoren1 says you can do it with just the one TIFF, so I will have to give that a try.

So in answer to your question my original image that I used was not raw.
..... Skippy
.

Skippy

eoren1 wrote:

Hey Skippy,
Just so you know, PhotomatixPro will also let you play around with a single image if you shot it in RAW mode. Just convert it to a 16 bit tiff and open in the program. See what you get from these and if it can save you the trouble of converting to all of the different exposed versions of the single image.
E

ps - awesome work on the above!

Thank you I shall have to give that a try
Better still I should go get myself a set of images in RAW and try it the way your meant to do it thanks for the tip ... Skippy
.

Skippy

Thanks everyone, I want to learn to do this process porperly, thank you all for looking and thanks for the tips ... Skippy
.

Marc Muench

Very cool Skippy


Ok, I'm goin technical on you! First off - these images look great
I believe that when you process the same exposure for a wide range of values ( -2 to +2 ) the first effect you would see in a print would be the noise from the over exposed sections of the file. This is why the actual camera brackets would be prefered. However, my issue has always been that by the time you have taken 17 bracketed exposures the day is over!!!!
Practically speaking, the branches in your tree shot would have most likely moved during the duration of time between exposures. Later when HDR combines the optimal values together it mixes pixels of data and the result becomes a blurred branch or leaf. Therefore I have taken a similar approach to what you have done here. I process one RAW file through Camera RAW three times with different values, then combine them manuallly in photoshop later. I might not get quite the entire range of 17 bracketed exposures but I can use the technique on moving subjects. I do believe you could achieve this same look with only three or four exposures. Try a subject with many more shadows

I know we will see many in Glacier NP with the snow. Also, I will be demonstrating the manual merge process I use while in Glacier.

Cheers

davev

Very nice Skippy.

I'll agree with everyone else, you did a great job on these.
Most of the times when I look at an HDR, I can't find any black in the shot, and it drives me nuts.
Yours are done right to give you a wide range but not forgetting to leave some blacks and whites.

I would think that this could be done with a lot fewer pictures also.
I downloaded the trial version of photomax and I got pretty good results using 3 shots.
Try -1, 0, and +1 EV, or any 3 that you'd think would work out well. (ie -2, 0, +2 EV)

If you have the time, give one of these two a shot with only 3 versions.
I'd like to see how it turns out next to the 17 shot version. (my trial has been over for awhile now)

Your examples may have just cost me $99.:D

BeaKeR

Wow, those are... inspirational. And a bit intimidating. Good work!

Photoshop CS3 is supposed to have HDR support built in, has anybody tried using that? Does it measure up to dedicated software like Photomatrix?

Skippy

Marc Muench wrote:

Very cool Skippy


Ok, I'm goin technical on you! First off - these images look great
I believe that when you process the same exposure for a wide range of values ( -2 to +2 ) the first effect you would see in a print would be the noise from the over exposed sections of the file. This is why the actual camera brackets would be prefered. However, my issue has always been that by the time you have taken 17 bracketed exposures the day is over!!!!
Practically speaking, the branches in your tree shot would have most likely moved during the duration of time between exposures. Later when HDR combines the optimal values together it mixes pixels of data and the result becomes a blurred branch or leaf. Therefore I have taken a similar approach to what you have done here. I process one RAW file through Camera RAW three times with different values, then combine them manuallly in photoshop later. I might not get quite the entire range of 17 bracketed exposures but I can use the technique on moving subjects. I do believe you could achieve this same look with only three or four exposures. Try a subject with many more shadows

I know we will see many in Glacier NP with the snow. Also, I will be demonstrating the manual merge process I use while in Glacier.

Cheers

Thanks Marc, I can't wait till the Dgrin Shoot Out in September,
I am looking forward to learning more, and who better to learn from than someone like you who really knows his stuff .

I understand what you are saying about using just 3 shots, and I will be trying this out indeed I will, I am thrilled that the process actually worked for me, as I was not using a RAW image to start off with, nor was it an image that had been edited on this computer that I am using now, or with PhotoShop.

Thank you for your comment Marc, I appreciate it ... Skippy
.

Skippy

davev wrote:

Very nice Skippy.

I'll agree with everyone else, you did a great job on these.
Most of the times when I look at an HDR, I can't find any black in the shot, and it drives me nuts.
Yours are done right to give you a wide range but not forgetting to leave some blacks and whites.

I would think that this could be done with a lot fewer pictures also.
I downloaded the trial version of photomax and I got pretty good results using 3 shots.
Try -1, 0, and +1 EV, or any 3 that you'd think would work out well. (ie -2, 0, +2 EV)

If you have the time, give one of these two a shot with only 3 versions.
I'd like to see how it turns out next to the 17 shot version. (my trial has been over for awhile now)

Your examples may have just cost me $99.:D

Thank you, but it's all Devbobo's fault that I got started on this .
.... Skippy
.

Skippy

BeaKeR wrote:

Wow, those are... inspirational. And a bit intimidating. Good work!

Photoshop CS3 is supposed to have HDR support built in, has anybody tried using that? Does it measure up to dedicated software like Photomatrix?

Don't be intimidated, I am just an every day shooter like most other folks on this forum BeaKeR, trust me I would probably be the least technical person you'll come across on the forum.

Go have a look at the Photomatrix web site they have some comparison images there.

The Photomatrix program doesn't seem that hard to use even for us non-techo-heads, and I'm sure the techo-heads will get more out of it than I will .... I say go download it and give it a go

You have nothing to lose, and a free demo program to learn with .
... Skippy

Phyxius

Marc Muench wrote:

I know we will see many in Glacier NP with the snow. Also, I will be demonstrating the manual merge process I use while in Glacier.

WooHoo!! How many more sleeps Skippy?

But seriously, I forgot to post on here after I saw that images...
Very cool shots and processing. I've tried one "HDR" type shot, but it was manual with layering and masks in photoshop. I may have to get the trial and give it a go now. :

Great job!!