Hdr

[The Vulcan]

I hate the grain and lack of detail with Photomatix and the like so I've been playing around with my own version of HDR constructed from self made pre-sets.

I also decided that bracketing and attempting the align was a pain and set about with the concept of a single image HDR.

I think I'm getting there but maybe you disagree!

Opinions please to encourage me to continue

The images are loaded as Adobe RGB so may be a little discoloured on some monitors

p.s. Anghor Wat - Cambodia

Edited December 9, 2008 by The Vulcan

[Bard]

First of all very nice shots Vulcan, and I must say the HDR you done is great. Very good luminance indeed keep up the good work, you are definitely getting results.

Cheers Bard

[baahjun]

so you did this in p'shop ?

looks good, would like to know how

[The Vulcan]

so you did this in p'shop ?

looks good, would like to know how

I did this using a combination of Lightroom/Capture One/Photokit Colour and a "tidy-up" in CS3. When I'm satisfied with it (still some tweaking to do) I'll ask my computer genius friend to produce a programme (?) to share with you all

[mitmig]

and attempting the align was a pain

In CS3 there's an auto align for layers and it works perfect. Select the layers you want to align and then choose 'edit' and 'auto-align layers'.

I've found this tut very useful http://stuckincustoms.com/2006/06/06/548/

The HDR-effect on your photo's looks great! Personally I would tone down the effect a bit more, but that's just my taste

[The Vulcan]

Thank you "Mitmig" - the toning down is indeed a thought that has crossed my mind also.

Good HDR link also

[Jimmyd]

HDR as most people know it is cool, but it's not really my thing. I use similar techniques, however, to manipulate images to make them as I see things in real life. Too often my eye sees some elements in real life, but those same things are blown out (i.e. gone to white) in the image from the camera.

Here's what I mean:

The original picture with a blown-out background:

However, when I'm there, that's not what I see--what I see is more like this, where I can see the background:

In this case I used a single raw image developed at different exposures, but in other cases have used multiple exposures (usually for stagnant scenes). The 40D is good for this because if it's 6 frame per second capability and exposure bracketing.

[Kan Win]

Hi "The Vulcan",

Very nice indeed, only for me a tad too dark.

Did you use a Raw photo or .jpg?

Will have to try one again with ACDSee Pro 2.5.

Have you up-date your Photomatix to 3.1 version free up-grade.

Yours truly,

Kan Win

[The Vulcan]

Hi "The Vulcan",

Very nice indeed, only for me a tad too dark.

Did you use a Raw photo or .jpg?

Will have to try one again with ACDSee Pro 2.5.

Have you up-date your Photomatix to 3.1 version free up-grade.

Yours truly,

Kan Win

Always shoot RAW - trying to make do without Photomatix at present, find the finish a little "rough". Anyway, ain't got a Mac copy

[Bard]

Anyone tried the Hydra HDR plugin for Aperture? It looks very promising.

Cheers Bard

[thetravellingcat]

Good work. I look forward to seeing more.

[aeon]

"The HDR-effect on your photo's looks great!" ???

HDR is not an effect, is just a descriptive acronym of some kind of picture files (raw, hdr, exr, and others) which can store much more colors than the 256 stored by 8bit per channel picture files.

[Kan Win]

"The HDR-effect on your photo's looks great!" ???

HDR is not an effect, is just a descriptive acronym of some kind of picture files (raw, hdr, exr, and others) which can store much more colors than the 256 stored by 8bit per channel picture files.

From wikipedia.orgi/High Dynamic Range imaging

In image processing, computer graphics, and photography, high dynamic range imaging (HDRI or just HDR) is a set of techniques that allows a greater dynamic range of luminances between light and dark areas of a scene than normal digital imaging techniques. The intention of HDRI is to accurately represent the wide range of intensity levels found in real scenes ranging from direct sunlight to shadows.

Yours truly,

Kan Win

[aeon]

well I know wikipedia is contributed by common people who may say something not accurate:

HDRI and HDR are two things or possibly three, not completely separate, but still different.

HDR acronym of high dynamic range, is not a set of techniques, but just a description of the greater range of colors of a scene which can be stored on some file format through particular software algorhythm (raw, hdr, exr etc.) and hardware.

In the case of .hdr files this name describe the type of algorhythm used.

HDRI (HIGH DYNAMIC RANGE IMAGERY) instead can be called a set of techniques, as well as HDR Photography.

..."than normal digital imaging techniques"

are 8bit images normal techniques? this make the 16bit and 32bit sounds abnormal?

I can assure you that for many professional (especially in computer graphics) 8bit 10bit 12bit since the creation of some file format like hdr or exr, they are just obsolete, but still useful in some case.

In any case I still sustain that HDR is not an effect. Maybe selective exposure can be a more descriptive and accurate name.

[aeon]

also consider that the page of wikipedia you linked, as well as many others are constantly modified for missing or inaccurate information, look at the date of last update, it says : This page was last modified on 26 January 2009, at 21:49

so don't rely on wiki as an absolute knowledge.

[t.s]

the Angkor shots look ratherlike they have been manipulated in topaz.

interesting