HDR efex pro?

[tommytinkroom]

What do op's think of this software,it appears to be the most expensive but is it the best.
I see that most op's prefer Photomatix pro and HDR efex does'nt seem to get mentioned.

 

[nos33]

from what i remember of that program, it is a plugin and does not compile the pictures. photoshop and photomatix will both compile them and give you your basic hdr then you can use hdr efex to tonemap it. It was a really good program just very buggy and kept crashing my photoshop.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I went to an HDR class and the instructor went over the pro's and con's of the different software. He preferred Photomax Pro V4. Thats what I use and can't remember why he liked it more than the others because I use it anyways and didn't pay it much attention.

 

[Provo]

HDR Efex Sucks PERIOD.....
And it's the only Nik Tool that sucks I should add that as well.

 

[tommytinkroom]

HDR Efex Sucks PERIOD.....
And it's the only Nik Tool that sucks I should add that as well.

What about Artizen HDR?

 

[Light Guru]

I actually prefer HDR Efex over photomatic. The controls are a lot easier to figure out and use. I have found that I get to a result that I'm happier a lot faster. And I love the nodal point controls.

 

[Bynx]

I think I preferred the old Photomatix Pro 3.0. I actually seemed to work with it. Since 4.0 came out and the other software like HDR Effex Pro its more a matter of picking which preset you want. And sometimes there just isnt one that suits the image.

 

[Provo]

I think I preferred the old Photomatix Pro 3.0. I actually seemed to work with it. Since 4.0 came out and the other software like HDR Effex Pro its more a matter of picking which preset you want. And sometimes there just isnt one that suits the image.

I am partially with you on that I loved photomatix 3 and I swear at time it seems you still get better results with it you know I been saying that since day 1 of when photomatix 4 coming out. However in photomatix 4 the preset's are a stepping stone all of the presets can be adjusted it's just a starting point I always go for default and then make my changes while looking at the histogram my goal is to get a nice bell curvature or double hump.

I wold like to see what else they throw into photomatix in the future.

I also failed to mentioned my 2nd choice software that I use which is Dynamic Photo HDR5

 

[JuhaH]

Hi,
I just purchased Nik HDR Efex Pro, installed it, and made first test pictures. First impression is that HDR Efex is easy to use, but I have run into situations where the HDR blending mode left some ghosting artifacts and there was a quite much noise (grain) in smooth skies. Heres one test picture, that I took with Canon 5DII. I used auto exposure bracketing feature, with -1,0,+1. Do you have any idea what is causing the noise? Therese's almost no noise at all in the original RAW pictures.

Thanks in advance.

 

[vipgraphx]

Personally I like photomatix but I have used HDR PRO. I think in some cases HDR depending on what you like HDR pro can deliver a nice HDR image. I do like the fact that you nave nodes/control points you can add and subtract. I think it wold be cool to use both and blend photomatix and hdr pro in certain images. I will note that while testing them both I ended up purchasing photomatix.

This is one of my very first HDR images using HDR PRO and *I am very proud of the processing I was able to accomplish my very first time. Composition could be better I know but this image is posted as a reference. I want to add that along with presets in HDR Pro there is also a method tab and strength. I used Fresco to get this effect. Photomatix could not do this straight out of the software!


bike by VIPGraphX, on Flickr

For this reason I think keep debating on purchasing this software. There are times when I would like to get this same method of processing in newer photos I have taken. However I am very happy with photomatix.