Bogley

jowchie · Joined: 29 Dec 2006 Posts: 13 Location: SLC

HDR - High Dynamic Range Photography... usually at least 3 shots with different exposures combined to get a very wide tonal range. But nowadays can be achieved using 1 RAW file converted to HDR using a software called photomatix pro. There are a lot of techniques on the web as well.

Post your HDR photos here as well. :D

Pier @ Bear Lake

accaddacca's view(taken from his office window)

more here:
http://flickr.com/photos/jowchie/sets/72157600180828848/

CarpeyBiggs · Joined: 18 Mar 2007 Posts: 1722 Location: Fairbanks, AK

I like the top one fairly well, but the bottom one is a little to crazy for my taste.

Personally, (and I am simply expressing my opinion, not trying to start a war) I like to use graduated blends and locally controlled techniques to get the dynamic range I'm after. I just find HDR to look to cartoony.

Sorry, a bit off topic. But here is an HDR from me.

It hasn't been tone-mapped in the sense of Photomatix though. Helps keep the colors more realistic, in my opinion. Notice the halos as well. Takes some serious work to get those under control using most software solutions. If I did it locally, wouldn't be too hard to make a clean mask. This is 3 exposures, spread 2 stops apart. YMMV.

gonzo · Joined: 07 Feb 2007 Posts: 788

CarpeyBiggs wrote: I just find HDR to look to cartoony.

Agreed. HDR was the technique du jour on Flickr a few months ago, and it didn't take too many pictures before I burned out on it.

That being said, I just figured out how to do automatic bracketing with my camera, and I was thinking about trying to generate some HDR images. Photomatix is more than I want to spend though. (If I had $100 for software I'd buy Topo!)

Alex · Joined: 27 Sep 2005 Posts: 2413 Location: SLC, UT

What camera do you have?

CarpeyBiggs · Joined: 18 Mar 2007 Posts: 1722 Location: Fairbanks, AK

kris247 wrote: That being said, I just figured out how to do automatic bracketing with my camera, and I was thinking about trying to generate some HDR images. Photomatix is more than I want to spend though. (If I had $100 for software I'd buy Topo!)

Do you have photoshop? There are other options and techniques that provide just as nice of results. Usually easier too.

gonzo · Joined: 07 Feb 2007 Posts: 788

Alex wrote: What camera do you have?

I'm shooting a Canon S3 IS. I wouldn't recommend it though - it's really noisy on ISOs above 200, and nearly unusable over 400. The 12x optical zoom is nice though.

I saw that there is an S5 out now, it's possible they fixed the noisiness, but I haven't checked it out.

CarpeyBiggs wrote: Do you have photoshop? There are other options and techniques that provide just as nice of results. Usually easier too.

Yes, and no. I have Photoshop, but it's pretty old. I believe it's PS6, but I don't recall off the top of my head. I know it's pre-CS.

I have The Gimp, but a graphic designer friend of mine described Gimp as "emitting a large sucketh noise", and I find it hard to disagree.

CarpeyBiggs · Joined: 18 Mar 2007 Posts: 1722 Location: Fairbanks, AK

kris247 wrote: I saw that there is an S5 out now, it's possible they fixed the noisiness, but I haven't checked it out.

Check out this review. They seem to like it. Noise is better, but still pretty bad at 800.
https://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/Powershot%20S5.shtml

sparker1 · Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 12:55 pm Post subject:

I tried HDR using Photomatix (free trial version), but was never happy with results. Using layers will allow much the same kind of flexibility. For example, one layer exposed for the sky, another for the foreground, processed independently then blended (either using a layer mask or simply erasing part of one layer).