Strange HDR question (no, it isn't "what is HDR")

[sabbath999]

I don't shoot HDR at all.

Heck, I don't even own a tripod, so HDR is right out for me...

But I was wondering... Could you expand the dynamic range of a picture with HDR like procedures by shooting with your camera set to both JPEG and RAW capture?

The two images would be very distinct.

Just curious.

 

[Arch]

Hmm i dont think it would be any different to shooting RAW on its own to be honest. The RAW file has to be processed before it can be used for the HDR, so really you will still only end up with a similar exposure which you could then make an over/under exposed version of. It would end up as a tone mapped image.

 

[Digital Matt]

You would just shoot raw and process multiple jpgs at different exposures from 1 raw file.

 

[notelliot]

if i remember right, sabbath, you have a D300, right?

if you have the grip, shoot a raw burst at 8fps while somewhat bracing the camera. if you set up auto bracketing, you should be able to get 3-4 frames that line up pretty good. i'd try that, as well as splitting one frame into 3 or 4 exposure values.

i used to talk to woodsac (where did he go?) about hdr a lot, he was pretty helpful. sw1tchfx is also pretty knowledgeable when it comes to tone mapping and hdr.

 

[Sideburns]

It wouldn't work cause the exposure is exactly the same.
You can do HDR without a tripod though...most HDR programs will line up the content as long as you're close. Just shoot in burst and AEB...as long as it's bright enough you should be fine.

 

[JH2008]

You don't even need a tripod if you have Ps3. The layers can be auto aligned. Great feature!

 

[Big Mike]

I've taken a single RAW exposure and processed it into two or more images, then combined them to end up with a final image that has more range than a single exposure would normally be able to handle.

 

[Monz]

does anyone know if you can do auto bracketing with a D40x I can't find it.

 

[sabbath999]

Yes, I have a D300.

The reason I was asking, the raw images out of the D300 are actually very different looking than the JPEG ones because all the nifty tricks with Active D-Lighting and such are applied to the JPEGs but not to the RAW.

I don't currently have the battery grip (6fps is really quite enough for my needs).

As far as auto bracketing with the D40x, nope, you can't do it. Not an option.

 

[JerryPH]

The purists will say that it "cannot" or "should not" be done. I have only touched on HDR a couple of times myself and am far from knowledgeable about it.

What I do not know is, if are there elements that are captured differently when you take a set of pictures purposely under and over exposed (as in bracketing) in that set, that do not exist vs you taking a single raw image and create multiple images with different exposure values from it.

That would be the main question in my mind. I tend to think that there is more "info" in a bracketed set of pics over one RAW picture thats been PPed into various exposures.

Of course, the single RAW file used to create multiple exposure level JPGs trick does work, I tried that with some success, but I never played with the 2 options on a single "subject" and made comparisons to see if there were drastic differences or enhancements using one method over the other.

One distinction has to be made, though... though tone mapping can be made in both Photomatix and PS, the real HDR effects are only available in Photomatix. I've not yet seen a real HDR look emulated in PS.

 

[kidchill]

If you check for posts by Domromer he was posting some 1 RAW file tonemapped pics. I'm pretty sure he was using photomatix. I've tried both and feel that CS3 is lacking. But, then again, I like the surreal but not totally blown out qualities of HDRs. If you just want more range but a realistic pic, then use CS3 or make adjustments for it in photomatix. But yes, you can use 1 RAW file to make a "tonemapped" photo. If you call that true HDR, someone on here is likely to argue that it's not true HDR and bla bla bla....

 

[Garbz]

Yes, I have a D300.

The reason I was asking, the raw images out of the D300 are actually very different looking than the JPEG ones because all the nifty tricks with Active D-Lighting and such are applied to the JPEGs but not to the RAW.

They may look different but they should have the same dynamic range. Which means identical detail can be recovered from both images. Unless that is the Active-D system applies some destructive changes when processing to JPG. In which case some detail may be lost.

Digital Matt if you take 1 photo it doesn't matter how you process it. You will not get "High Dynamic Range" Screwing with the exposure sliders in a RAW processor does not magically create detail that wasn't captured in the first place. Regardless of what some :scratch: people say.

 

[Digital Matt]

Garbz, you can easily extend the dynamic range of a picture by changing the exposure of a raw file or a jpg. Dodging and burning extends the dynamic range of a photo. Tweaking levels with an adjustment layer selectively increases dynamic range. The detail is there in a negative, and it is there in a raw file or a jpg. Yes, not as much as what is possible with multiple exposures, but it is still there, and it does increase the dynamic range. I'm not going to argue about semantics. If you don't want to call it HDR, then don't. I will.

 

[notelliot]

if you wanted to get extremely technical, XDR is an expansion of dynamic range using one exposure, HDR is the expansion of dynamic range using multiple exposures.

 

[GwagDesigns]

Thats how ive done a lot of my pictures, just by changing the exposure in lightroom so i have 5 images at -2, 0, and +2 esposure value, exporting them and loading them in Dynamic Photo HDR, or Photomatix. This first link is an example of that

http://gwagdesigns.deviantart.com/art/Construction-79044322

This second link is a technique ive learned on how to achieve a higher contrast image, using only a RAW editor. It can get you close to what the filter Lucis Art would give you, providing your image has good highlights and shadows, Scott Kelby's blog show you how here http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2008/archives/1094

And my picture with said effects here
http://gwagdesigns.deviantart.com/art/Supa-79380674