Matt's HDRs.

[matbor]

Some more HDR's that i have taken recently......

Feel free to comment.


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/04/402.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2008/12/167.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2008/12/168.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2008/12/169.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2008/12/170.jpg

[mjm295]

Some more HDR's that i have taken recently......

Feel free to comment.

Whats a HDR, I'm a noobie to photos.

[matbor]

Whats a HDR, I'm a noobie to photos.

This video will probably explain it a bit better than me :D
YouTube - HDR Technique (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s14rvLKKH60)

[dmdigital]

#2 and #4 are great, don't like the way the tree renders in #1 or #5.

HDR is something I'm still to really try out. I keep seeing some fantastic shots but haven't got around to giving it a go.

What software are you using?

[matbor]

#2 and #4 are great, don't like the way the tree renders in #1 or #5.

HDR is something I'm still to really try out. I keep seeing some fantastic shots but haven't got around to giving it a go.

What software are you using?

thx.

#1 is more arty... prints out well in large format, might look good on canvas. Funny thing is the tree isn't in focus in that photo, accident :)

IMO, HDR is a type of photography that you either like or don't like, at first I didn't really like it, but now I am loving it. However don't really like the real grunge look!

I'm using Photomatix, seems to be the best around, pretty simple to use once u watch a couple of vids and read a little.

Matt.

[discomuzz]

How many images and what exposure compensation did you use?

Love HDR and panoramics.

Trying to perfect techniques using my mobile phone.

[matbor]

How many images and what exposure compensation did you use?

Love HDR and panoramics.

Trying to perfect techniques using my mobile phone.

My camera only does 3 brackets, could do more if i could be bothered ;) normal 2 over and 2 under.

[discomuzz]

My camera only does 3 brackets, could do more if i could be bothered ;) normal 2 over and 2 under.

So your camera has Auto Bracket Exposure (ABE)?

I have to manually change the settings on my phone which makes it really difficult to keep the images stable. Built a small tripod bracket which helps.

I'll upload some images to photobucket and put some links in here if you like.

Done any panorama stuff?

[matbor]

So your camera has Auto Bracket Exposure (ABE)?

I have to manually change the settings on my phone which makes it really difficult to keep the images stable. Built a small tripod bracket which helps.

I'll upload some images to photobucket and put some links in here if you like.

Done any panorama stuff?

yep.

Sounds good...

not yet... will sooner or later ;)

[dmdigital]

Strange I'm very much into Panoramas and yet to really try HDR. At least with HDR you wouldn't be generating gigabytes of file :(

[discomuzz]

Strange I'm very much into Panoramas and yet to really try HDR. At least with HDR you wouldn't be generating gigabytes of file :(

Can't really see any difference.

I use 3-5 images to generate HDR and usually a similar amount for panos.

By the way, have you tried producing panos. on-board, so to speak, your image device without any post production.

Makes lining up frames just that little more of a challenge.

[dmdigital]

Can't really see any difference.

I use 3-5 images to generate HDR and usually a similar amount for panos.

By the way, have you tried producing panos. on-board, so to speak, your image device without any post production.

Makes lining up frames just that little more of a challenge.

I usually stitch 10 to 20 shots for a panorama. My DSLR doesn't give me any options to stitch "on-board". The key issue with aligning shots is to use a tripod or level surface, keep the camera level and overlap by about 50%. I did a how to on pano's in this section the other week.

The HDR's don't end up nearly as big as the pano files as they flatten out once created. They are bigger than one of the originals though.

[discomuzz]

This is a 360 degree practice shot in the park across the road.

Everything was done on-board my phone.

http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/8430/panoman009wq0.jpg (http://img388.imageshack.us/my.php?image=panoman009wq0.jpg)

The original image was resized. Tripod mounted but I made the mistake of using Auto settings for exposure which really makes the stitches stand out.

Now that you have me inspired again I might have a bit of fun this arvo. and post the results if you are interested.

Edit: As you can imagine, the image is heavily distorted

[dullbird]

jesus what sort of phone are you taking these pics on?

do you not have a camera DM?

[discomuzz]

jesus what sort of phone are you taking these pics on?

do you not have a camera DM?

DM?

The phone is a Nokia N95 using Panoman software.

Pretty clever huh?

Edit: DM! Got it. I have a Nikon F801 and D60. But I like to play with the phone as I have that on me all of the time.

[dullbird]

very impressed with the pics coming out of that phone for a phone of course

[vnx205]

HDR has some practical applications as well as artistic possibilities.

This isn't true HDR, but is a very quick, easy, free method of achieving some of the same effect.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Engine%20HDR.jpg
Compare the detail in the shadow like the throttle linkages to the left of the AC compressor.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Axle%20HDR.jpg
HDR (imitation) on the left. It's not just a case of making the photo lighter. In fact there is more detail in both the highlights and the shadows which is part of the point of HDR.

This was done with just one version of each image instead of multiple images like proper HDR.

[vnx205]

Here's another one.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ (http://imageshack.us)


It's done with the free Paint.net program I mentioned in another post.

If anyone is vaguely interested, I'll give you more details.

[discomuzz]

... for a phone of course


Yeah limited, but not bad for point-and-shoot stuff.

http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/8056/compentrysmalljg9.jpg (http://img390.imageshack.us/my.php?image=compentrysmalljg9.jpg)

[Slunnie]

Here's another one.

http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/8776/dashhdrex3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


It's done with the free Paint.net program I mentioned in another post.

If anyone is vaguely interested, I'll give you more details.
Oooh yeah, I'm interested. I just started a thread asking about this.

[discomuzz]

It's done with the free Paint.net program I mentioned in another post.

If anyone is vaguely interested, I'll give you more details.

Isn't it basically like adjusting stuff in Photoshop(e.g.)?

I agree, does have practical use though.

[vnx205]

As I said, it isn't true HDR, but as you have seen, the results aren't too bad.

The program Paint.net is a free open source graphics program which will probably replace Windows Paint.

You can download it for free from here.
Paint.NET - Download (http://www.getpaint.net/download.html)

Then you need some of the free plugins that people have written for it.
They are available here.
Paint.NET • View forum - Plugins - Publishing Only (http://paintdotnet.forumer.com/viewforum.php?f=16)

One of the ones you need is the Recover Shadow/Highlights plugin. It is part of this package.
Paint.NET • View topic - Tanel's Photo and Color Plugins (2008-12-24) (http://paintdotnet.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=26350)

Basically all you need to do is use the Recover Shadow/Highlights plugin. You may need to fiddle a little bit with the tonal range too.

[vnx205]

Isn't it basically like adjusting stuff in Photoshop(e.g.)?

I agree, does have practical use though.
Yes it is, but this program is FREE, unlike Photoshop.

[discomuzz]

As I said, it isn't true HDR, but as you have seen, the results aren't too bad.

Cheers! I'll bare it in mind. At the moment I'm concentrating on PhotoMatix.

My ImageShack account is over limit so I can't upload stuff atm.

[discomuzz]

Yes it is, but this program is FREE, unlike Photoshop.

Depends who you know!

[dullbird]

so in order to do a HDR you need at least 3 pics from bracketing i'm assuming so 1 norm 1 +1 and 1 -1 and then they all get put together before putting it into the photomatix program to do the tone condesor or the details enhancer? am I on the right lines here?

So I was wondering if this is the case is there a need to bracket could I just take my favorite image and copy 3 times each time saving it with and exposure compensation?
would that be good enough do you think

[discomuzz]

Yep. Spot on!

On the phone I take 3 images (-2, 0, +2).

On the D60 I take 5 images (-2, -1, 0, +1, +2) if the contrast of the scene can justify it or three images if not. But I always use steps of two for Exp. Comp. though.

In PhotoMatix, you can fiddle with settings 'till your heart's content.

I imagine you could simply manipulate one image and achieve HDR type stuff,
but that would be cheating.

It's worth remembering though that, one of the main requirements of top quality HDR images is the use of .RAW format images (16 bit Vs. 8 bit .jpg) as a source (hence H.D.R).

Manipulate and then save as 8 bit jpegs.

[dullbird]

so I watched the video you put up......and getting all the images together on automate in photoshop I dont seem to be able to do, i'm assuming my photoshop is to old as I run PS 7

[discomuzz]

I didn't put-up any videos. But that's cool.

My Photoshop is pretty old and doesn't have the auto HDR function either.

You can, however, find YouTube stuff on the older system though (after you sift through the rubbish).

I just use what comes out of PhotoMatix at this stage (even has the PhotoMatix watermark). Not too worried about the fine tuned or arty side of things (a web site I use calls arty style photos "pharts") at the moment.

[vnx205]

..... .. ... .. ..... ..

So I was wondering if this is the case is there a need to bracket could I just take my favorite image and copy 3 times each time saving it with and exposure compensation?
would that be good enough do you think
This might go some way towards answering your question.
I downloaded a free program called Qtpfsgui and tried what you suggest.

It's been great fun playing around and I've found that from one single original image I can produce anything from fairly realistic to really weird when I play around with the inbuilt Tonemapping.

I found I could turn this original
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Paris%20Bridge.jpgInto thishttp://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Paris_pregamma_1_durand_spatial_0_range_9.2_base_4 .28.jpgor thishttp://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Paris_pregamma_1_fattal_alpha_0.1_beta_0.8_saturat ion_1.5_noiseredux_1.jpgor even thishttp://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Paris_pregamma_1_fattal_alpha_0.1_beta_0.8_saturat ion_2.47_noiseredux_0.jpg

If you right click on the images to get the properties, the filename (by default) shows the Tonemap used and the settings.

I'm not sure how useful it is but it's good fun.

[vnx205]

Another example.
The original,
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Lucerne.jpg
fairly realistic
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Lucerne%20HDR.jpg
and arty or is that pharty.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Lucerne%20HDR%201.jpg

I can't help with your other question about Vista. I'm doing this on an 8 year old computer running Xubuntu.

[discomuzz]

Pretty clever stuff!

Might give it a go.

[matbor]

Went and stayed up at a mates farm over New Years, took some more HDR's... Will post the results over the next few days... but here is the first one. (Click the pic for the larger format.)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1579.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/3155291953_ca4e6b74f8_o.jpg)

[discomuzz]

Is it multiple or single exposure HDR?

Nice image though!

[weeds]

cool stuff

[vnx205]

A few days ago, partly in response to a question from DB and partly from my own natural curiosity, I tried a couple of "quick and dirty" versions of HDR.

The first was just using shadow and highlight recovery on a single image using Paint.net.

The second was using a singe image but changing the brightness to create something like bracketed exposure.
The results are in earlier posts if anyone is interested.

I just tried proper HDR with three exposures +1, 0 and -1 EV.
It will probably come as no surprise that the results are superior.

I used a free program called Qtpfsgui.

This is the original photo.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Dashboard%20800.JPG
and this is the HDR version.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/Dashboard_pregamma_1_fattal_alpha_0.1_beta_0.8_sat uration_1_noiseredux_0.511_800.jpg

I know it's not especially artistic and could do with a little bit of manipulation, but I think it shows a practical application for the increased dynamic range. The detail in the shadows and on the wall behind is much more visible.

[Xavie]

It's a pic of a Defender. How much more artisitic can one get?

I really like HDR. Been playing with it for several months and if I had known abou it before I bought my D40x I wouldn't of bought a D40x. For me I just find it to difficult to change the settings as it needs to be done whilst the camera is staying absolutely still on the tripod and all of that sort of business. I look really forward to getting a camera where you just tell it to do it!

[vnx205]

I only discovered that there was such a thing as HDR when Matt started this thread and as you can probably tell I am fascinated by it.

The novelty hasn't worn off yet. I justify the amount of time I have spent playing with it by telling myself that I need to learn as much as I can so that of I need to use it I will have some idea what settings to use.

The only software I have used is that free program that I mentioned so I don't know how it compares with others that are available.

My camera (strictly speaking it's my wife's; I still have a 35mm SLR) is a fairly basic Sony S90, so I have to poke around on the back of the camera to change the exposure setting between shots.

The program has the ability to adjust the alignment of the images and it seems to work pretty well. I imagine that other programs would have the same facility, so that should take care of minor movement of the camera between exposures. perhaps you just meant you dislike having to change the setting manually, not that changing the settings spoiled the results.

[matbor]

Is it multiple or single exposure HDR?

Nice image though!


three exposures

[dullbird]

It's a pic of a Defender. How much more artisitic can one get?

I really like HDR. Been playing with it for several months and if I had known abou it before I bought my D40x I wouldn't of bought a D40x. For me I just find it to difficult to change the settings as it needs to be done whilst the camera is staying absolutely still on the tripod and all of that sort of business. I look really forward to getting a camera where you just tell it to do it!

what do you mean?

what settings? or do you mean you cant braket on a D40x and thats why its needs to be still on a tripod

[dmdigital]

It's a pic of a Defender. How much more artisitic can one get?

I really like HDR. Been playing with it for several months and if I had known abou it before I bought my D40x I wouldn't of bought a D40x. For me I just find it to difficult to change the settings as it needs to be done whilst the camera is staying absolutely still on the tripod and all of that sort of business. I look really forward to getting a camera where you just tell it to do it!

There is a https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ button behind the on/off/shutter. Press and hold and turn the command dial at the rear to the left or right to set the EV.

Even if you can't actually take a bracketed sequence, you can quickly change the setting without looking after a little practice or without moving the camera on the tripod.

[B92 8NW]

There is a http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40x/Images/Icons/expcomp.gif button behind the on/off/shutter. Press and hold and turn the command dial at the rear to the left or right to set the EV.

Even if you can't actually take a bracketed sequence, you can quickly change the setting without looking after a little practice or without moving the camera on the tripod.

I'm certain you can do auto exposure bracketing. My S5 does it, so surely Canon would have extended that mode to their range of DSLRs (inc. the 40D)

[dullbird]

D40x is a Nikon

[B92 8NW]

D40x is a Nikon

I was thinking 40D instead of D40, whoops, my bad, ignore that:D:cool:

[matbor]

With the Nikon's....

D40/D60 doesn't have a bracketing button.

D80/D90 only does 3 exposures, D300 and above up to 9 exposures.

[matbor]

Here are some more.... all 3 exposures.... again click the pic for a larger version.

Had some of them printed today, the first one and the bike look awesome in large format !!!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1531.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3217/3156734505_63642e4b15_o.jpg)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1532.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3243/3156740151_4e4b35074b_o.jpg)

and another version of the above, looks like a painting...
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1533.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3120/3157568692_89c1917f78_o.jpg)

Can u see the ghost !!
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1534.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3290/3156744569_57b205e8c0_o.jpg)

[vnx205]

Matt, what Tone maps and settings did you use for some of those?
Which Tonemaps do you find most successful?

So far I've found Fattal gives the most interesting results. No noise reduction gives surreal effects and full noise reduction gives fairly realistic results.

[matbor]

Matt, what Tone maps and settings did you use for some of those?
Which Tonemaps do you find most successful?

So far I've found Fattal gives the most interesting results. No noise reduction gives surreal effects and full noise reduction gives fairly realistic results.

Using Photomatix, no specific settings though as every photo is different and if there is noise that i don't like i put it though noise ninja!

[vnx205]

I remembered from back on about Page 1 that you were using Photomatix.

As I have mentioned I was using Qtpfsgui, but I thought some of the algorithms or Tonemaps might be common.

Qtpfsgui offers Mantiuk, Fattal, Drago, Durand, a few versions of Reinhard and a couple of others. They seem to have different controls and give different results. I think they are named after the people who developed the algorithm. Does Photomatix use any of these?

I had expected that different photos would need different setting and even different Tonemaps to get best results, but I was hoping that if our programs had some things in common, it might give me some ideas.

Maybe they don't have enough in common to make it worthwhile, but I just thought I would ask.

[dmdigital]

Had to have a look at the program you are using to see what you meant, Photomatix looks a lot different, this is a example of what the tone maping etc looks like... https://www.aulro.com/afvb/
Give it a go, download a free trial copy here... HDR photo software & plugin - Tone Mapping, Exposure Blending & HDR Imaging for photography (http://www.hdrsoft.com/)

Good tutorial on how to use it here... YouTube - Photomatix and Photoshop Tutorial - Creating HDR images (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNRlJVG6LOs)

Matt.

[dullbird]

ok so I had a go but I had to create 3 different exposures using virtual copies....and well to be honest it came out crap :no2:

I didn't seem to matter how much I played with it I couldn't get it looking like anything you guys have done and the original image was so much better

[discomuzz]

ok so I had a go but I had to create 3 different exposures using virtual copies....and well to be honest it came out crap :no2:

I didn't seem to matter how much I played with it I couldn't get it looking like anything you guys have done and the original image was so much better

The original image really needs to be cranked right up and down if you are using copies.

Without doubt the best option is separate images with individual Exp. Comp. in steps of two each side of normal, preferably in .RAW format and a high contrast scene.

AKAIK!

[dullbird]

The original image really needs to be cranked right up and down if you are using copies.



Without doubt the best option is separate images with individual Exp. Comp. in steps of two each side of normal, preferably in .RAW format and a high contrast scene.

AKAIK!


yeh I managed to find some pics which were bracketed but I only had them in jpeg......and the pics didn't quite match up as they were done of a boat on water and the boat ad obvioulsy moved a fraction.....

I must say it was a bit better to work with...........
but what I dont understand is your saying raw! well I take all my pics in raw but in order for me to export from lightroom to photomatix it has to be changed to a tiff....So whats the big deal about raw anyway as i would assume some loss of detail would occur with the conversion from raw to tiff before it even got into the program

[discomuzz]

You're probably right! For us pleb types the difference is negligible.

This is what Wikipedia says.

.raw
"Camera raw files have 12 or 14 bits of intensity information, not the gamma-compressed 8 bits stored in JPEG files (and typically stored in processed TIFF files); since the data is not yet rendered and clipped to a color space gamut, more precision may be available in highlights, shadows, and saturated colors".

My understanding is, .raw files provide greater depth of color for contrast/saturation/etc. manipulation.

Basically, a nicer base image!?

[dullbird]

You're probably right! For us pleb types the difference is negligible.

This is what Wikipedia says.

.raw
"Camera raw files have 12 or 14 bits of intensity information, not the gamma-compressed 8 bits stored in JPEG files (and typically stored in processed TIFF files); since the data is not yet rendered and clipped to a color space gamut, more precision may be available in highlights, shadows, and saturated colors".

My understanding is, .raw files provide greater depth of color for contrast/saturation/etc. manipulation.

Basically, a nicer base image!?


oh yeh I understand that....but I cant put a raw file and work on that in photomatix I have to convert to tiff or do you think the loss of detail etc is negligible.....or was that what you were basically saying:D

[discomuzz]

Which photomatix are you using???

Mine can open lots of different versions of .raw files (ie. Canon, Nikon, etc.).

I am using the version 3 demo!

[dullbird]

Which photomatix are you using???

Mine can open lots of different versions of .raw files (ie. Canon, Nikon, etc.).

I am using the version 3 demo!

yes so am I put I have the plug in to export direct from lightroom

[vnx205]

DB, you should be able to get reasonable results starting with a single JPEG image.

Your standards are probably a lot higher than mine, but I reckon this is reasonable for a shot taken under very much less than ideal lighting conditions. The sun was in almost the worst possible place and I couldn't do much about that.
I won't comment on the subject. :p

I know they are not a patch on Matt's, but then I am using just one pretty ordinary JPEG original.

Original
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/DB.JPG

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/DB2_pre_1.242_reinhard05_brightness_-2_chromatic_adaptation_1_light_adaptation_0.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[dullbird]

I'll comment on the subject I think it looks bloody fabulous actually ;)

[vnx205]

I'll comment on the subject I think it looks bloody fabulous actually ;)
OK, but what about the manipulation of the image?;)

[discomuzz]

OK, but what about the manipulation of the image?;)

If you could get rid of the sunlight reflections and the reflection of the dude standing next the drivers door, you would have a cool image!

[discomuzz]

yes so am I put I have the plug in to export direct from lightroom

Have you tried opening straight into photomatix?

What are you doing in lightroom that you can't re-save as .raw?

Or, have I got the wrong end of the stick?

[vnx205]

If you could get rid of the sunlight reflections and the reflection of the dude standing next the drivers door, you would have a cool image!
Yes you're right. I know it could be Improved with some fine tuning. (Or maybe some major alterations.)

I was only worrying about what could be done with the HDR software so that I could fairly quickly produce an example to show DB that acceptable results could be obtained with a single JPEG file (as long as your standards aren't too high).

[vnx205]

If you could get rid of the sunlight reflections and the reflection of the dude standing next the drivers door, you would have a cool image!
A bit more like this maybe? OK I know it's a bit rough, but if I spend too long on it the thread fills up so quickly that it no longer seems relevant.:p

Anyway DB seems to be aiming a little higher with questions about RAW files.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[discomuzz]

A bit more like this maybe? OK I know it's a bit rough, but if I spend too long on it the thread fills up so quickly that it no longer seems relevant.:p

Anyway DB seems to be aiming a little higher with questions about RAW files.


Makes a big difference. Good image (for a .jpg:angel:).

I understand your points.

[dullbird]

A bit more like this maybe? OK I know it's a bit rough, but if I spend too long on it the thread fills up so quickly that it no longer seems relevant.:p



Anyway DB seems to be aiming a little higher with questions about RAW files.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/DB2%20rt.jpg

not aiming higher really just looking for the most versitilty which is what RAW gives you.....

[matbor]

DB, i suggest you just go outside and shoot any object bracketed then have a play, also suggest you have a look on youtube on how best to use photomatrix, it helped me understand the settings bigtime !!

some more cool HDR pics here... Flickr: The HDR Pool (http://www.flickr.com/groups/hdr/pool/)

also here.... Flickr: The Australia HDR Pool (http://www.flickr.com/groups/australiahdr/pool/)

matt.

[matbor]

Another one of mine ;).....


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1508.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3096/3162426118_f2c6773dd5_o.jpg)

[dullbird]

I was wrong I just wasn't sending it the right way from lightroom you can send over a raw file....

this is just from manually setting the different exposures via the comp.....I will have a go at the bracketing but am I on the right track?

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1506.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1507.jpg

[vnx205]

You must be doing something right. :p There is a lot more detail on the dingo's shoulder and in the dark patch of grass on the left and it still looks quite realistic.

[discomuzz]

I was wrong I just wasn't sending it the right way from lightroom you can send over a raw file....

this is just from manually setting the different exposures via the comp.....I will have a go at the bracketing but am I on the right track?

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1506.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1507.jpg


Cool! Well done DB.

[dullbird]

ok so I have watched a couple of tutorials.....now only to realise that photomatix is only a started everyone seems to take them back into photoshop or lightroom for all the adjustment stuff..

which now makes me understand a little bit better

[discomuzz]

...which now makes me understand a little bit better

I can hear the cogs grinding from here!:)

[matbor]

Here is a cool little program if u have a iPhone and want to take a perfectly bracketed photo with you DSLR!

Mark Fletcher - HdrHelper (http://web.mac.com/markpfletcher/iWeb/Site%202/Mark%20Fletcher%20-%20HdrHelper.html)

[300+]

Just found this thread.

Here is my best HDR from a couple of years ago:


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Cheers, Steve

[matbor]

Just found this thread.

Here is my best HDR from a couple of years ago:


http://www.reddock.net/aulro/HDR2.jpg

Cheers, Steve


That's pretty cool Steve, nice work.

Matt.

[discomuzz]

It's a Coke sign!

Nice image though dude.

Hand beaten copper and the design would indicate a religious theme and the reflected blue could be the entrance to a theme park?

[300+]

It is actually one of the statues on Sandridge Bridge, at Southbank in Melbourne. They are meant to represent immigrants who arrived at the bridge by train. This one is a guy with a shovel.

The reflected lights are just the cafes of Southbank.

The material is stainless, but the lights are not neutral, so there is a colour cast which makes it look somewhat coppery.

Cheers, Steve

[matbor]

It is actually one of the statues on Sandridge Bridge, at Southbank in Melbourne. They are meant to represent immigrants who arrived at the bridge by train. This one is a guy with a shovel.

The reflected lights are just the cafes of Southbank.

The material is stainless, but the lights are not neutral, so there is a colour cast which makes it look somewhat coppery.

Cheers, Steve

Think i found what it looks like on Flickr... the travellers on Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/varf/231128999/)

[Taz]

Much depends on the compression/gamma/tone-mapping algorithms. It's difficult to get them looking realistic/natural. Not to mention the posible motion blur. But if your really keen on this stuff, there are 16bit printers out there. There are also 16bit HiDef monitors but at 50k US they are a bit exxy at the moment. However the monochrome 12bit monitors used in the medical industry are much cheaper.

[300+]

Think i found what it looks like on Flickr... the travellers on Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/varf/231128999/)

That's the one. I use a mini-tripod on the yellow beam. It was quite tricky as the angle meant I couldn't see through the view finder - I had to snap and check the LCD at and awkward angle to frame the shot.

Cheers, Steve

[discomuzz]

It is actually one of the statues on Sandridge Bridge, at Southbank in Melbourne. They are meant to represent immigrants who arrived at the bridge by train. This one is a guy with a shovel.

The reflected lights are just the cafes of Southbank.

The material is stainless, but the lights are not neutral, so there is a colour cast which makes it look somewhat coppery.

Cheers, Steve

Yeah, but I was close though!;)

[discomuzz]

...There are also 16bit HiDef monitors but at 50k US they are a bit exxy at the moment.

No! Only a "bit exxy"!:o

Nice information though, thanks!

[dmdigital]

No! Only a "bit exxy"!:o

Nice information though, thanks!

It's all relative, the first 21" Monitor I used cost over $100,000 it was a Sony and could display almost VGA quality and weighed over 40kg's - Ansett Air Freight put a fork lift tyne through it:eek:

[dullbird]

Ok so I think I have got it did a bracket today on the car and tried again with 2 stops difference like you suggested

they are the same pic HDR is just cropped

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/1334.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2011/01/1324.jpg

I want to thank you matt for bringing this editing stuff to my attention as i'm about to submit some pics to a mag and I have done a couple of HDR's like this one to show some of the accessories:)

and you are also right in the fact that now I have done it I see what advantages it has and I enjoy doing them


Who else is using the trial software?

[discomuzz]

...Who else is using the trial software?

Nice work DB!

Very clever stuff ain't it?

CS4 demo here and PhotoMatix.

I don't see a PhotoMatix watermark though on yours.

Is this all done in CS#(?) ?

[dullbird]

:angel:


this is why I asked who was using the trial;)

[discomuzz]

Ok folks?

By creating a HDR image, regardless of pre- or post-production software or gizzmos, are we not just pseudo 'developing' the original .raw image?

The difference between DB's No.1 and No.2 images above is the difference between a .jpg and a .raw image?

AKAIK, all CCD imaging devices used for basic (ie. non-scientific) imaging take the image in .raw format.

[dullbird]

Ok folks?

By creating a HDR image, regardless of pre- or post-production software or gizzmos, are we not just pseudo 'developing' the original .raw image?



The difference between DB's No.1 and No.2 images above is the difference between a .jpg and a .raw image?

AKAIK, all CCD imaging devices used for basic (ie. non-scientific) imaging take the image in .raw format.

not exactly!
as they are both .raw images because it is the same image only the second has 2 other .raw images blended in with it

you cant use my'n above as an example of jpeg and raw as even though the 2 is a HDR the first still has way more info than a jpeg

[discomuzz]

not exactly!
as they are both .raw images

Good point!

[discomuzz]

... the first still has way more info than a jpeg

This is more what I was getting at though.

[dullbird]

oooooo ok sorry my bad!

[discomuzz]

oooooo ok sorry my bad!

No dramas!

It's that my phone only deals in .jpgs!

It annoys me. I feel cheated!

Edit: ...now that, my friends, is how bad it gets after 26 years of marriage!

[matbor]

My Disco... this is a old HDR.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/01/984.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3431/3187734808_0e2e28eb91_o.jpg)

[matbor]

Been playing, which one do you like ?

1.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/1478.jpg

2.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/1479.jpg

3.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/1480.jpg

4.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/02/1481.jpg

[300+]

1st one. The board texture really pops out at you. The framing does look better in the others however, but the HDR effect really comes through in 1, without looking artificial.

Cheers, Steve

[AJSLRD]

Matt,

I like number 2 from the samples, looks more natural, on this monitor anyway also you got more detail under the toe where it would be dark.
But one thing that I find in all these shots is the need to belt those nails in before you hurt yourself.:eek::wasntme:

Allen

[dullbird]

yep number 2 for me as well

[Grumpy]

No1
but yoz need to use a tripod sos all zee images are the same.

T :wheelchair:

[300+]

And move the dog's bowl from the background! If you are taking a picture of a boot on a deck, then make it a picture of a boot on a deck. Don't make it a picture of the boot on a deck by a bowl with a stool and a pink door frame.

Cheers, Steve

[matbor]

And move the dog's bowl from the background! If you are taking a picture of a boot on a deck, then make it a picture of a boot on a deck. Don't make it a picture of the boot on a deck by a bowl with a stool and a pink door frame.

Cheers, Steve

Yeah, just playing with Photomatix technique more than anything.

[werdan]

My first attempt at an HDR using 3 images

Nice. It looks like a picture from an old brochure.

[matbor]

Handheld HDR taken in Beechworth, Vic at the weekend.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/05/280.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3015/3558806539_c6f0729324_b.jpg)

Matt.

[matbor]

One that I took in Cambodia last year, and wasn't happy with the way i processed it originally, think it is a lot better now.

Angkor Wat at Sunrise, 3x exposure HDR. Used Photomatix and Lightroom.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/07/850.jpg (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2586/3719828781_2010de6ca9_b.jpg)
(click to enlarge)

Matt. (http://www.bordignons.net/flickr)

[dullbird]

nice!! shame you lost the middle ground

[Taz]

To get the best out of Tone mapping, it helps if you know your monitors response (min and max luminance) and work with an algorithm that uses it. Which is not easy because it can vary by +/- 30% over the surface of the monitor and is also time dependent. The weak link in the 'dynamic range chain' if you like, is generally not the camera. Most consumer monitors these days are 6bit panels, and whilst you can represent any dynamic range you like with 6bits, the quantisation steps become very large and introduce nasty color shifts and worse. Most tone mapping algorithms try to boost local contrast based on how human vision works. That is the eye does not 'measure' absolute luminance, instead it responds to relative changes. Which is lucky for us because an outdoor scene on a bright day can easily have an average luminance of 20,000 cd/sqm , whilst our monitors are lucky to do 300 cd/sqm (LED backlit LCD's are higher). The problem with local contrast tone mapping is the reverse halo effect that appears to be evident in most images on this thread - that is a dark halo around bright areas in the image. To get the best results, you need to experiment with different algorithms until you find one that works for your image. There is no one tone mapping algorithm that works for all images.

[slt]

To get the best out of Tone mapping, it helps if you know your monitors response (min and max luminance) and work with an algorithm that uses it. Which is not easy because it can vary by +/- 30% over the surface of the monitor and is also time dependent. The weak link in the 'dynamic range chain' if you like, is generally not the camera. Most consumer monitors these days are 6bit panels, and whilst you can represent any dynamic range you like with 6bits, the quantisation steps become very large and introduce nasty color shifts and worse. Most tone mapping algorithms try to boost local contrast based on how human vision works. That is the eye does not 'measure' absolute luminance, instead it responds to relative changes. Which is lucky for us because an outdoor scene on a bright day can easily have an average luminance of 20,000 cd/sqm , whilst our monitors are lucky to do 300 cd/sqm (LED backlit LCD's are higher). The problem with local contrast tone mapping is the reverse halo effect that appears to be evident in most images on this thread - that is a dark halo around bright areas in the image. To get the best results, you need to experiment with different algorithms until you find one that works for your image. There is no one tone mapping algorithm that works for all images.


+1
My advise is to go easy on the 'Strength' and 'Light Smoothing' sliders (eg. if you're using Photomatix) unless you absolutely want that unholy halo look!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/07/796.jpg

My mate's Model T in the 'tunnel' at Kirribilli. Early morning sun was highlighting the hood and inside canopy with everything else pretty dark. This would have been impossible without resorting to HDR. 5 exposures from a tripod.

slt

[p38arover]

Which version of PhotoShop has Merge to HDR? My version 7 doesn't.

[slt]

I'm using CS3 (= Version 10), and it has. Dunno about earlier ones.

[p38arover]

Ta. I'll have to upgrade.

[mjm295]

My Camera offers this:


Continuous Exposure Bracket: The camera can shoot three continuous images with the exposures shifted automatically. It uses 2 settings.

Bracket 0.3Ev continuous: This setting shoots images continuously with exposure value shifted by plus or minus 0.3 step.
Bracket 0.7Ev continuous: This setting shoots images continuously with the exposure value shifted by plus or minus 0.7 step.


Single Exposure Bracket: The camera can shoot frame by frame with exposure value shifted automatically. It uses 2 settings.

Bracket 0.3Ev single: This setting shoots images frame by frame with the exposure value shifted by plus or minus 0.3 step.
Bracket 0.7Ev single: This setting shoots images frame by frame with the exposure value shifted by plus or minus 0.7 step.




Is that what I need to use for HDR's? It can do 0 and +/- 0.3, 0.7, 1, 1.3, 1.7, 2

I'll dig the tripod out and have a play!!!

[slt]

Yep. You might wanna use the 0.7ev setting to notice the difference. 0.3ev may be too subtle.

[TimNZ]

Messed about with photoshop and photomatix today, its amazing how much more detail you can get messing about with tonemapping. This is not a true HDR as I only had one exposure to play with, but here is the result:

Original

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/07/663.jpg

Tone Mapped

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2010/03/718.jpg

Looks like I have a new way to waste hours on the laptop! Thanks for the inspiration Matt, (I think??) :)

Tim

[dullbird]

Yes I too had another crack at the HDR today with a photo I took this morning:)

Before

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/07/636.jpg

After

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/07/602.jpg

I don't know what you guys think but I feel its taken the flatness out of the pic....I like it anyway:)

[WhiteD3]

Assuming your pic is neither under or over exposed; can you take one raw pic, create a separate lighter and darker pic, then create a HDR from the 3?

[dullbird]

you can do that with in photomatix! take the one pic and then change the values on the other two (as it gives you the option to do this if you only export one pic to the program)....but to be honest I would rather bracket like I did to get the picture above.

the before pic is a 0 exposure it was then generated with a -2 pic and a +2 pic exposure. I was told once that is probably better to go 2stops and I agree you get much more of the light and dark areas in..

[matbor]

Another one from Cambodia, 3x exposure HDR of a sunrise, and lightroom colour change. Kind of like the look of this, sort of makes it look old fashion.

Have decided that sunrise's/sunset's need minium of 5x exposures! which is a pain on my camera!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/07/546.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3478/3742782074_bb6f36b061_b.jpg)


Matt.

[300+]

Assuming your pic is neither under or over exposed; can you take one raw pic, create a separate lighter and darker pic, then create a HDR from the 3?

Yes you can. However, you aren't adding data which wasn't there. In a true HDR you are taking a wide range of data from multiple images and compressing it into one.

The raw file has the full dynamic range in it but you are limited by how much you can display on your monitor - which is generally an 8 bit device. So HDR is an easy way of dropping the data you don't need and compressing it to the range you can display, bringing both extremes of highlight and shadow into view. They were always there, but your monitor couldn't display it.

The harder way is to use dodging, burning, masks, grad filters, etc. in PS to do the same thing. All these techniques do is make the most of the range that is there.

However, if you want the surreal look of HDR you can use that technique.

In my testing I'm happier with the natural look of using the manual tools on a single exposure RAW for some shots and the surreal HDR for others.

Cheers, Steve

[mjm295]

My first HDR. Just took 4 shots (freehand) of the dog on the bed. Dark coloured dog on a cream fleece throw.

Originals have Cooper in good detail but the fleece is whited out, through to fleece in good details and Cooper as a black outline!!!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/07/227.jpg

I need to get some better quality originals to play with, these were taken quick as he never sits still for long once the camera is out.:o

[mjm295]

I had the dogs pulling me along, but managed to fire a few shots off, here are the results put through photomatix. Both are 4 different exposures:

The background is a bit hazy in the 1st one.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/08/1999.jpg
and
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/08/2000.jpg

[dullbird]

I like the first one nice job

[mjm295]

I like the first one nice job

Thanks, wasn't easy keeping the camera still with 2 boxers pulling to get to the cockatoo's:mad:

Was at Narabeen Lake if anyone is interested.

[dmdigital]

5 shot 2sec +/-2EV bracket of falls at park gateway at Cradle Mountain.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2010/10/408.jpg
Thought I'd give it a go at long last. This is with PS CS3's HDR Merge. I'm not in a position to download the Photomatix plug in at present.

[Chucaro]

Very good exposure control, the whites are very good and there is not detail lost on them.

[mjm295]

Finally managed to get a dog to sit still for 2 minutes! Please excuse the selotape!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/08/1628.jpg

[dullbird]

that looks great!!!!!

[matbor]

I felt insirped by mjm295's dog HDR, so thought I would as well :D

Anyhow, this is a bit more subdue.

Matt.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/08/1618.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3559/3795161262_4a3e536b4b_b.jpg)
(Click to enlarge)

[djambalawa]

I find I can get pretty good results with just one image if I use RAW... this is done in photomatix;

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/08/1230.jpg

Just seems too hard to get a good image with moving water/clouds when trying to do multiple exposures... for me anyhoo...