does anyone have

[kalmkidd]

the tutorial on how to do a ''fake hdr'' in photoshop im very curious of my outcome with it. thanks in advance

 

[Garbz]

In photoshop CS2 or later convert the image to 32bits/channel and then convert it back to 8bits/channel. This will open up the tonemapping dialogue. I'm not sure if there's another way to access it, but it seems like a nifty workaround.

 

[tedgtfan]

the tutorial on how to do a ''fake hdr'' in photoshop im very curious of my outcome with it. thanks in advance

Here are the links I was given. Hope they help. Tutorial is on a link on this first links page at the bottom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging

http://www.popphoto.com/howto/3038/h...ge-images.html

http://range.wordpress.com/2006/07/...aphy-a-how-to-or-saturday-morning-relaxation/

 

[D-50]

What do you mean fake an hdr? do you mean taking one image and turning it into an hdr image..if so as long as the image is not blown out anywhere and its shot in raw adjust the image 1.5 stops both ways and run it through photomatix. This works well,not as good as separate exposures but decent, this is how the majority of hdrs of people are done considering its tough to get three differently exposed images of a person even when using continuous shooting and bracketing without them moving to some extent. If your not combining images then I would say its pretty tough to create an HDR. You can use a high pass filter on an overlayed layer, that will give your contrast a boost, combine that with mulltiple USM filters and adjustments with the shadow/highlight filter and youll get something the looks unnatural but it will not have that hdr quality to it.

Personally in my opinion HDR is an interesting effect but as more and more people learn to do it correctly and it becomes commonplace I believe it will be nothing more than selective coloring or long exposures with moving lights, they are interesting to a non photograher but not that impressive when shown to someone who knows how you did it.

 

[Garbz]

I think he means tonemapping an 8 bit image. I still don't see the sense in making 3 exposures from a single jpeg or a RAW because when I tried it all ways the tonemapper reduced them to the same result anyway. A far cry from what a tone mapper can achieve with a proper 32bit image made of several exposures.

 

[D-50]

What program are you using? if its the HDR function in CS2 that is junk. Ive done several hdrs froma single exposure changed into three in PHotomatix and they comeout fine, your right not the same as using three separate exposures but close. Also I create 3 16 bitt tiffs from one raw and combine them. I never touch Jpeg, the idea of compression turnsme off, so does the idea of 8 bit, Iknow to the eye its hard to tell but I try to keep files as high quality as I can, the price of memory is so cheap Im not concerned with storage space at all.

 

[Garbz]

Very true. The CS3 tonemapper's output looks far better. There are plenty of comparisons out there, with photomatix vs CS2 there was a night and day difference in favour of the former, but vs CS3 you'd need a microscope to tell the difference.

 

[skieur]

HDR is a technique that has become an overused fad. I have seen a lot of HDRs here that are fuzzy and soft focus. I have seen other HDR landscapes that could have been accomplished just as easily with standard postprocessing. Still others look unreal and when the novelty wears off, so will their effectiveness as photos.

Any technique either contributes to the effectiveness and impact of the centre of interest or detracts from it. If I were an illustrator as in book and novel covers, childrens' books etc. then one of NJs HDR pics comes to mind as ideal. HDR is also perfect for doing interior architectural shots because of the range in tones and contrast from windows, lights etc.

but for all kinds of random shots..... I don't think so.

skieur