Discussion in 'Landscape & Cityscape' started by DRodgers, May 24, 2007.
Got up before the cows for this one, my first HDR so please C&C me .
Thanks for looking.
Well, me being brand new to the HDR concept, I have to say that this looks like a long exposure rather than a HDR. Maybe wait for the sun to rise just a tad more to get some colour, and light on the grass. Great concept though!
The whole point of HDR is exposing for brighter and darker tones than you can normally capture in one frame, this you have done successfully as there is detail in the ground which would be lost on a single frame and the image looks realistic (none of this 'filtered' rubbish that many people 'think' is HDR - oh how they will be so very let down when HDR monitors become the norm). However you probably do need a little more day light on the ground as it still looks pretty dark.
You have details in dark zones but the sky remains overexposed anyway. Looks like you didn't get an 'underexposed enough' shot, so you couldn't capture the whole dynamic of the scene. How many steps did you cover?
thanks for the great response so far ..
I'm having huge amounts of trouble getting this to work for me..
ev steps -42
the biggest problem i notice is it looks good when first merged and then when i save the look changes dramatically..
Well, even if it's not a great HDR, I still love the shot
I tried this in 2 layers with one image instead of separate images of the set 1 stop apart it looks great on my monitor but the colors are two saturated when printed..
DRogers, I don't understand your answer.
You used 3 shots, yes? Bracketing? (+/-1,+/-2?)
If you had 100ev delta for your shots, I'm sure you would have gotten the dynamic, and far more
Separate names with a comma.