EV 1 or 2

BlairWright · Dec 3, 2011

Trey of at Stuck in Customs is really the HDR expert. He has a pretty good tutorial over on his site.

480sparky · Dec 3, 2011

OK, take a given landscape scene, with the sky half covered with clouds, and the sun directly behind you high in the sky. That scene has a given, measurable dynamic range, does it not? You need to take more than one exposure in order to capture the range between the bright, sun-lit clouds and the deep, dark shadows in the scene.

Now, if you were able to magically replace the sun with a full moon in the exact same spot in the sky............. the scene has the exact same dynamic range.

vipgraphx · Dec 3, 2011

Yeah I understand this and I am not saying that you or I am right. I answered the question that the OP asked. This is how I have come to learn how to do it based of Trey of at Stuck in Customs and it works. I am sure there are even those that will take 9 exposures. Trey said one time he took 100....All I can say is look at his portfolio..can you argue his technique??

Not trying to argue just answering my thought.

480sparky · Dec 3, 2011

I'm still trying to understand why 'low light' shots require -2/-1/0/+1/+1 frames, while well-lit ones only require -2/0/+2. You capture the same range with both, although you have more control with the 5 frames in post.

100 shots? C'mon, get real........... unless he's shooting 1/3 EVs.

vipgraphx · Dec 3, 2011

He said he did it once and will never do it again.....I am not sure exactly why to be honest with you other than what he explains makes sense to me.

bs0604 · Dec 4, 2011

It would seem to me that if you take a picture and the camera histogram shows all the highlights and shadows to be contained within the histogram, then taking additional pictures at underexposed and overexposed and merging in to HDR would not alter the image and thus no need for HDR in this situation?
As a corollary, it would also appear that if you take a picture and, eg, all the highlights are w/i the histogram, but the shadows are not fully included, then you just need to change the shutter speed untill you get exposure(s) that now include all the shadows, and then process in HDR. A relatively easy way to avoid needing a Starlite?

Rephargotohp · Dec 4, 2011

Although a Starlite is of course nice to have, a spot meter in yor camara is suffcient for HDR work since we are taking a series of exposures not just one that has to be perfect.

You can also do a quick test, Go to the brightest part of your scence and set you meter on that at +2 then move to the shadow area and if that meters -2 or less, you probably have a good candidate for HDR. It's not the most precise method but it avoids you in a quick manner, shooting something that doesn't need HDR and a LOT of scenes are shot with HDR that don't need it

bs0604 · Dec 4, 2011

But am I correct in thinking that if the shadows and highlights are completely contained within the histogram that additional bracketed shots & HDR processing won't change the image?

Rephargotohp · Dec 4, 2011

Honestly it depends, Sometimes you will get it in and you see a Two hills and a big valley response, and it not so much the total range but the relationship of the tones that needs to be changed or tone mapped making it "As the eye sees"

People way over-think HDR, way overshoot way over process. For the most part, Most HDR's can be captured with 3 Images 2EV apart. provided you find your right center exposure.

Most of my most successful and received HDR's have been shot with 3 exposures

But people get into the 3 is good 9 must be better mindset ( and yes I have had to do 9 exposures sometimes) and it really isn't. The more exposures lead to registration errors on complex textures regardless of your tripod (shifts can occur even though your image didn't) and that leads to loss of detail.
Then people overshoot the bracketing and those grossly overexposed and under exposed images REALLY affect image detail. It's hard for the software to find an edge of contrast to align if there is none on that super blown out exposure or that super dark one.

and then people shoot subjects that don't need HDR at all and that leads to just a big Flat Mess of Midtones.

3 works most times, 5 is Good. I've done more when the sun is in the image or shooting an architectural interior with has a huge DR

My 2

Rephargotohp · Dec 4, 2011

Oh and one last thing, Before it can be a great HDR it has to be a great photograph. If it doesn't have great light and great composition first, it will never be a great HDR. And great light is important. HDR is not a substitute for great light, it only allows you to capture that great light full. If you have flat uninteresting light, you will never make a great HDR. And if the "HDR" is the subject of interest in your photo, you have failed. Just like Black and white does not make the photograph great, it was a great photograph that happened to be Black & White...or HDR

SlickSalmon · Dec 4, 2011

Rephargotohp said:
People way over-think HDR, way overshoot way over process. For the most part, Most HDR's can be captured with 3 Images 2EV apart. provided you find your right center exposure.

Most of my most successful and received HDR's have been shot with 3 exposures

But people get into the 3 is good 9 must be better mindset ( and yes I have had to do 9 exposures sometimes) and it really isn't. The more exposures lead to registration errors on complex textures regardless of your tripod (shifts can occur even though your image didn't) and that leads to loss of detail.
Then people overshoot the bracketing and those grossly overexposed and under exposed images REALLY affect image detail. It's hard for the software to find an edge of contrast to align if there is none on that super blown out exposure or that super dark one.

and then people shoot subjects that don't need HDR at all and that leads to just a big Flat Mess of Midtones.

3 works most times, 5 is Good. I've done more when the sun is in the image or shooting an architectural interior with has a huge DR

My 2