First ever HDR

[EckoZero]

So whilst I was bored waiting for an update to load on my computer, I checked out Photomatix and got the free trial version.

I pulled up a photo, made a few exposures in LR and tonemapped them in Photomatix.

Here's my result:

What do you think? (I'm well and truly wearing my flame suit)
Any tips or pointers?

 

[1holegrouper]

Very good for a first HDR. I would try taking down some grain in the clowds in the detail part of LR (luminance, if I remember correctly) and turning down the blues and purples a bit and turn up the green a bit to compare. Perhaps spot heal out the bird since it is so far away it almost looks like an artifact. Also to the left of that is a dust spot.

 

[EckoZero]

Thanks for that.
I noticed the dust specks when I uploaded it to Flickr but I was too lazy to heal them out (it was late and I'm ill )

I'll give your suggestions a go RE purples/blues and greens

 

[lyonsroar]

made a few exposures in LR and tonemapped them in Photomatix.

I don't think that's a true HDR...

 

[EckoZero]

made a few exposures in LR and tonemapped them in Photomatix.

I don't think that's a true HDR...

Probably not but I think HDR has increasingly become a catch-all term for these sort of shots... I might be wrong though.

 

[lyonsroar]

made a few exposures in LR and tonemapped them in Photomatix.

I don't think that's a true HDR...

Probably not but I think HDR has increasingly become a catch-all term for these sort of shots... I might be wrong though.

I prefer to use the term "tone-mapping" for making a single picture into an HDR looking creation.

HDR implies that more than one exposure was used (at least to me)

 

[EckoZero]

HDR implies that more than one exposure was used (at least to me)

When I first learnt what HDR was, that was how it was explained to me. I think HDR to me is also a collection of exposures - I was just bored and thought I'd play around with a picture I wasn't keen on the original of but saw potential in lol.

I think that the term HDR is becoming more common for tone-mapped images though - whether rightly or wrongly.

 

[Provo]

Good reference what hdr is
This technically is a Tone mapped image
But hey it gave you practice at least

High-dynamic-range imaging - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Bynx]

All right EckoZero, you did say you were wearing your flame suit. Up until now I think people have been blowing smoke or they lost their glasses. First attempt or not, its not very good. The colors are much too saturated. The whole image has a magenta hue to it. Very noticeable in the sky as well as in the sandy areas which I would expect to be more brownish than white. Just below the people the area is burned out as well as the bottom left corner. This wouldnt happen if it was an HDR. When tone mapping keep your eye on the sky which ghosts out on contrasy images and/or gets a magenta look. Grass is effected too and often becomes nuclear yellow green. I like the composition. I hope HDR doesnt become a catch all phrase for tone mapped images. Its the tone mapping which make an HDR image good or bad. HDR has been around long enough now there are lots of explanations of exactly what it is. Once you understand that, then your images will improve. Now keep in mind what I said here is my opinions based on what I see. Take them for what they are worth. I hope you will stick with it and improve. When you have, you will be even more pleased with your own results.

 

[Provo]

All right EckoZero, you did say you were wearing your flame suit. Up until now I think people have been blowing smoke or they lost their glasses. First attempt or not, its not very good. The colors are much too saturated. The whole image has a magenta hue to it. Very noticeable in the sky as well as in the sandy areas which I would expect to be more brownish than white. Just below the people the area is burned out as well as the bottom left corner. This wouldnt happen if it was an HDR. When tone mapping keep your eye on the sky which ghosts out on contrasy images and/or gets a magenta look. Grass is effected too and often becomes nuclear yellow green. I like the composition. I hope HDR doesnt become a catch all phrase for tone mapped images. Its the tone mapping which make an HDR image good or bad. HDR has been around long enough now there are lots of explanations of exactly what it is. Once you understand that, then your images will improve. Now keep in mind what I said here is my opinions based on what I see. Take them for what they are worth. I hope you will stick with it and improve. When you have, you will be even more pleased with your own results.

I agree with Bynx keep on improving and when you look back you will see where you started
and how far you have come throughout your workflow process & presentation.
Gather as much knowledge as you can absorb & have fun transforming your
multiple shot's and processing them for your HDR result. But it has to start with multi Exposures
not just a single standard shot.

 

[EckoZero]

All right EckoZero, you did say you were wearing your flame suit. Up until now I think people have been blowing smoke or they lost their glasses. First attempt or not, its not very good. The colors are much too saturated. The whole image has a magenta hue to it. Very noticeable in the sky as well as in the sandy areas which I would expect to be more brownish than white. Just below the people the area is burned out as well as the bottom left corner. This wouldnt happen if it was an HDR. When tone mapping keep your eye on the sky which ghosts out on contrasy images and/or gets a magenta look. Grass is effected too and often becomes nuclear yellow green. I like the composition. I hope HDR doesnt become a catch all phrase for tone mapped images. Its the tone mapping which make an HDR image good or bad. HDR has been around long enough now there are lots of explanations of exactly what it is. Once you understand that, then your images will improve. Now keep in mind what I said here is my opinions based on what I see. Take them for what they are worth. I hope you will stick with it and improve. When you have, you will be even more pleased with your own results.

Thanks for the comments Bynx - I might go out and take some multi-exposures for a proper HDR rather than over tone-mapped saturated picture like this.
RE the sandy areas however, they were meant to be white - the shot was on the cliffs of Dover but I understand what you're saying.

Any ideas on how to avoid the nuclear green grass, colour bleeding with the two people or the blown areas?
You said this wouldn't happen with a true HDR - could you explain the how/why of that?

 

[Bynx]

The nuclear grass is caused by a lack of cyan and black. For some reason there is too much yellow. Dont know why that happens, but you can tell a tone mapped image by its unique horrible nuclear yellow. Halos in the sky is caused by Highlight smoothing. Pull back on the slider until the halos disappear. Any blown areas in a pic needed more underexposed shots. Underexposed pulls out details in the brighter areas, while overexposed pulls out details in the shadows. Keep in mind, digital is cheap and to take lots of exposures if you want an HDR image. You cant take too many shots, and you dont have to use them all. Just what you need to give you a great image.