First Successful HDR

[keith204]

Alright, after quite a bit of playing, I finally ended up with something I really like. Heck, I even like it enough that I put a black border around it to help balance the colors for online use. This came from one RAW file, exposed 3 ways and output to separate RAW files, then into Photomatix.

Canon 40D
ISO 400
Sigma 10-20mm @ 10mm
f/11 1/250sec

Here are the three 'exposures'

What do you think?

 

[Moglex]

This came from one RAW file, exposed 3 ways and output to separate RAW files

Could you expand on that a little, please?

 

[Bryant]

I think he means that he took only one shot in raw. Then in Camera Raw, he made it two stops under exposure, and then exported it into a new file. Then made it to stops over exposure and did the same. He then got 3 shots and used photomatix.

 

[keith204]

I think he means that he took only one shot in raw. Then in Camera Raw, he made it two stops under exposure, and then exported it into a new file. Then made it to stops over exposure and did the same. He then got 3 shots and used photomatix.

Yep

 

[Bifurcator]

You realize of course you didn't gain anything at all (except the experience of doing it) by taking it through a process like that right?

You can achieve the exact same results in several other much easier, ways without making separate files.

Since all the information you used in the assembly came out of one RAW file simple logic should tell you that indeed all of the information is contained in the one RAW file. If it's all there to begin with splitting it apart and reassembling it is just the hard way and the long way of selectively adjusting levels. There are better tools for doing that than having to go through the extreme hassle of loading and saving it three times and then trying to combine and tone-map the three into one.

 

[Moglex]

You realize of course you didn't gain anything at all (except the experience of doing it) by taking it through a process like that right?

You can achieve the exact same results in several other much easier, ways without making separate files.

Since all the information you used in the assembly came out of one RAW file simple logic should tell you that indeed all of the information is contained in the one RAW file. If it's all there to begin with splitting it apart and reassembling it is just the hard way and the long way of selectively adjusting levels. There are better tools for doing that than having to go through the extreme hassle of loading and saving it three times and then trying to combine and tone-map the three into one.

I didn't want to rain on your parade but he's correct about not gaining any extra information if not necessarily about there being an easier way for that particular result.

You can see get an idea of what can be achieved from the work you've done so the next thing to do is to take a set of 'bracketed' shots and use those as input to Photomatix (or whatever tool you use).

If you have easy access to the subject of the shot you showed above it would be instructive to try and get three shots with the same lighting conditions (as above) and compare the results.

The difference may not be that great with that particular subject but would be very noticable with more 'difficult' (i.e. contrasty) ones.

Whatever, I do actually rather like your shot.

 

[Arch]

yea, these guys are right about not gaining any extra information by using photomatix, However.....i disagree about it being a 'long' way to achive this effect... in fact it is probably one of the shortest ways to increase the visable range of a RAW file.
I prefer to take longer creating more range in my images using curves adjustment layers, sometimes adding screen layers etc to increase range... using photomatix is alot quicker but gives less control. The last time i used it (last week) i created the 3 seperate exposures and had finished loading them to Photomatix within about 5 mins!

As for the result, i kinda like it although the saturation is a little high for me.

 

[Rachelsne]

I agree with the satuation, nice pic to choose for this effect though.

 

[reg]

I think a little burning (no pun intended) and slight desat. on the foreground while keeping the background as-is would make this photo top notch.

 

[rubbertree]

just a quick hijack...
When doing HDR with 3 bracketed exposures, should you do it in jpeg rather than RAW? Or would 3 bracketed RAWs still give you all the information?

 

[Moglex]

Always use RAW for the greatest flexibility.

You will never lose information by shooting RAW.

You will always lose information by compressing to JPG.

 

[photo28]

:thumbup:

 

[Bifurcator]

yea, these guys are right about not gaining any extra information by using photomatix, However.....i disagree about it being a 'long' way to achive this effect... in fact it is probably one of the shortest ways to increase the visable range of a RAW file.

You can just load a single image and there will be the option to tone map it. No need to split it first - thus it is the long way.

If you're in PS just duplicating the layer twice (4 key strokes), using exposure, and adjusting the mixes and masks will achieve the same or better affect. Again much easier than loading, adjusting exposure, splitting, saving, reloading, and adjusting 10 or 15 sliders.

I really try very hard to separate that which i think may be true from that which I've tested repeatedly and am sure is correct by using "I think" or "I guess" in sentences where I only think it may be the case.

 

[Bifurcator]

As for the actual photograph I like it OK but try bringing it into PS and adjusting the they Yellow channel with the Hue/Saturation tool. I think you'll like it better adjusted to different levels.

 

[keith204]

Wow I missed out on a lot today! Cool, good to know this information. I haven't tried to simply edit the photo quite yet, but was impressed with the results from photomatix. I'll play some more.

Sounds like I wasted my time! Oh well, lesson learned!