difficult HDR picture?

qwertyjjj · Jun 9, 2012

So, how do you get an effect like this in HDR?
I've just been using the stadard settings in Luminance to date and they look good quality but this picture has a very surreal look to it that I can't seem to recreate on any of my own pictures.

Picture from: Google Image Result for http://media.smashingmagazine.com/images/fantastic-hdr-pictures/hdr-76.jpg

Compaq · Jun 9, 2012

Getting a good starting point from HDR merging software would be important. Big dynamic range, there. One thing I'm not quite getting, is where the house's shadow is. Shouldn't there be a shadow toward us, due to the sun's position?

Nice shot anyway! Probably looks "harder" to do than it is. Photoshop isn't magic.

qwertyjjj · Jun 9, 2012

Compaq said:
Getting a good starting point from HDR merging software would be important. Big dynamic range, there. One thing I'm not quite getting, is where the house's shadow is. Shouldn't there be a shadow toward us, due to the sun's position?

Nice shot anyway! Probably looks "harder" to do than it is. Photoshop isn't magic.

Standard HDR is 3 shots from -2 to +2ev, by wide dynamic range do you mean just more on the ev, more pictures?

fokker · Jun 9, 2012

qwertyjjj said:
Standard HDR is 3 shots from -2 to +2ev, by wide dynamic range do you mean just more on the ev, more pictures?

That is nonsense, there is no such thing as standard HDR. The exposure range depends entirely on what is present in the scene. Sometimes you will only need 3 exposures bracketed 1 or 2 EV apart, sometimes you might need 5 or even 7 spanning a range of 12 or more EV to capture the highlight and shadow detail in a contrasty scene.

Compaq · Jun 9, 2012

"Standard HDR" is a loose term that you shouldn't use. Every scene is slightly different. When you expose, you should always expose for the brightest point, expose for the darkest point and every point within. I normally use 1EV increments for my exposures. Sometimes I forget my tripod (in my haste to capture the light

), and then I shoot -2,0,+2 bracketed on my camera. Otherwise I start in the middle, then increase my exposure until I see I've exposed properly for the shadows. Then I decrease my exposure until I've exposed properly for the highlights. When I've got the exposures, making that image you showed is just a matter of editing skills. Of course, shooting RAW helps, and having a solid composition is a must for most photos (some can rely on emotion alone, but those need to be strong).

So, if you find a lovely scene, be sure to take enough exposures! Better to have too many than too few. As long as you have the exposures, and you've nailed the focus and such, you should be able to create stunning HDR photos with some practice in photomatix/photoshop or other software

qwertyjjj · Jun 9, 2012

fokker said:
qwertyjjj said:

Standard HDR is 3 shots from -2 to +2ev, by wide dynamic range do you mean just more on the ev, more pictures?

Click to expand...

That is nonsense, there is no such thing as standard HDR. The exposure range depends entirely on what is present in the scene. Sometimes you will only need 3 exposures bracketed 1 or 2 EV apart, sometimes you might need 5 or even 7 spanning a range of 12 or more EV to capture the highlight and shadow detail in a contrasty scene.

Yes, sorry, I just meant the easy way to do HDR or most commonly accepted way.

Compaq said:
"Standard HDR" is a loose term that you shouldn't use. Every scene is slightly different. When you expose, you should always expose for the brightest point, expose for the darkest point and every point within. I normally use 1EV increments for my exposures. Sometimes I forget my tripod (in my haste to capture the light ), and then I shoot -2,0,+2 bracketed on my camera. Otherwise I start in the middle, then increase my exposure until I see I've exposed properly for the shadows. Then I decrease my exposure until I've exposed properly for the highlights. When I've got the exposures, making that image you showed is just a matter of editing skills. Of course, shooting RAW helps, and having a solid composition is a must for most photos (some can rely on emotion alone, but those need to be strong).

So, if you find a lovely scene, be sure to take enough exposures! Better to have too many than too few. As long as you have the exposures, and you've nailed the focus and such, you should be able to create stunning HDR photos with some practice in photomatix/photoshop or other software

So, if you take more exposures do you end up with an image like in the first post that looks more surreal or does that have some other editing done to it?
When I take 3 exposures at -2, 0, and +2, I end up with a rich image but it still looks real.

EDL · Jun 9, 2012

Go download Photomatix (HDR photography software & plugin for Lightroom, Aperture & Photoshop - Tone Mapping, Exposure Fusion & High Dynamic Range Imaging for photography). You can use the free trial to play with it (it adds some watermarks all over the pic), but at least you can get an idea of what you can do with it.

qwertyjjj · Jun 9, 2012

EDL said:
Go download Photomatix (HDR photography software & plugin for Lightroom, Aperture & Photoshop - Tone Mapping, Exposure Fusion & High Dynamic Range Imaging for photography). You can use the free trial to play with it (it adds some watermarks all over the pic), but at least you can get an idea of what you can do with it.

Got Linux.

Compaq · Jun 9, 2012

I have no idea what software you can use on Linux

And yes, the so-called grunge look is all editing. I can make an image look "natural" and I can make it look "surreal", all by using a few sliders in photomatix. Take a look at this:

edit: no presets here, just knowing what to adjust, and it's done in 30 seconds

This is four exposures, by the way. Maybe I didn't need that many, but at least I've covered the range

Trever1t · Jun 9, 2012

OK, look, it's more than the blending software like Photomatix. Photomatix is only the starting point, not the end point. The image you linked to has a lot of photoshop editing going on, by the looks of it.

Bynx · Jun 9, 2012

Listen to Trevor. He knows where where he's coming from. Compaq also has some words to the wise as well. As for the pic its probably 50% Photomatix and 85% Photoshop.

vipgraphx · Jun 10, 2012

That picture you posted has many applied filters. They also are probably using other software like topaz and or nik. I know just by looking at that it has a glow filter and a warmth filter. All the colors have been altered and the sun may not be the real sun it could be added in. The light rays on the side also look like they have been added along with some sharpening on top...I like the image and the fellow how said it was easier done than said I think its the other way around its easier said than done. Unless you really know your way around photoshop and are not afraid to step out the box. Most folks on here like more of the realistic looking HDR and would not go where this picture has gone. However this is right up my alley with what I like. I do not like only one way of HDR I can appreciate a great photo realistic HDR but I can also appreciate a photo such as this that you know has acquired skill behind it.

EDL · Jun 10, 2012

qwertyjjj said:
EDL said:

Go download Photomatix (HDR photography software & plugin for Lightroom, Aperture & Photoshop - Tone Mapping, Exposure Fusion & High Dynamic Range Imaging for photography). You can use the free trial to play with it (it adds some watermarks all over the pic), but at least you can get an idea of what you can do with it.

Click to expand...

Got Linux.