Photomatix Vs Dynamic Photo HDR Comparison

[Provo]

I decided to run a test on an image that I had taken a while back, during this comparison test I am testing the industry leader Photomatix vs the competition Dynamic Photo HDR.
To be fair I tried to keep the settings the same through the test process, the images where then taken into Photoshop no extra settings except noiseware plug-in same settings applied to both images here are the results. Now I want to point out that depending on your source image you might prefer one software over the other I actually lately use both of them and then compare the results. Some of the images posted here in the forums that I have done have been created in photomatix I will be taking more test samples in the near future for a more accurate test and give you folks both images so you can see the difference.
Let the Judging begin !

Photomatix Pro 3.2.7 x64

Dynamic Photo HDR v4.65

 

[Bynx]

Ive only used Photomatix and I notice it gives a soft glow to the image. It needs some tweeking from Photoshop to get rid of it. Between the two images above I prefer the first one, but I like the sharpness of the second.

 

[McNugget801]

not even close to fair..
the first on is over tone mapped big time!

 

[newb]

Wow, Im surprised.

I like the effect of the first, even tho its not considered "correct."

But the second is much better than the first in terms of "correctness."

 

[Brick]

To me it seems like Photomatix does a better transition between light and dark areas. The rocks water and sky in Dynamic look like they have all been cut and pasted together.

As far as "correctness" goes. In my opinion that's in the eye of the beholder. Photography, like any art, is subjective. To some it's "over tone mapped" but to some it's unique and interesting. If you like the effect go with it. Unless someone is paying you to take pictures and wants something else - do what you like.

 

[Provo]

You can get the photomatix shot to look like dynamic photo hdr but you will have to play with the settings in particular the light settings. What I like about Dynamic photo HDR is that it has preset and all the presets let you adjust them to your taste which is good. But then again if you are starting out in photomatix you have a choice of 5 preset if I recall correctly and you can make your own and save them which is about the same. As mentioned one has pro's over another I noticed that if you take a night scene want the hdr look but more natural looking you would most likely end up using Dynamic over Photomatix because dynamic for some reason does a better job. Google some results that people have made using Dynamic Photo HDR even the ones on the companies site they are good images. Photomatix seems to get better detail out of the image for the hdr but you can end up with cartoonish images which you all gave witnessed one way or another it's a toss up some people prefer that look over the other to each their own I use both methods and the only reason person I am impressing is myself.

Here's a test for you take your 3 bracketed shots and use the same settings in both of the programs and compare your own results feels which one you like over the other. A good way to learn is to experiment

 

[newb]

As far as "correctness" goes. In my opinion that's in the eye of the beholder. Photography, like any art, is subjective. To some it's "over tone mapped" but to some it's unique and interesting. If you like the effect go with it. Unless someone is paying you to take pictures and wants something else - do what you like.

Believe me, I know this. But tell that to 75% of the ppl who critique the HDR's here.