Photomatrix test

[Syco]

Post deleted; Syco has left the building.

 

[ann]

I think just a bit of tweaking with curves to bring up the contrast. Merged images tend to be flat, it is just part of the process

 

[Edsport]

Yup, a bit of curves contrast would make it better in my opinon. Very good job...

 

[Sw1tchFX]

PhotoMATIX perhaps?

where are my Scandisk megapixel cards?

 

[ann]

this is just one shot then, tonempped?

 

[KongKurs]

this is just one shot then, tonempped?

?

I guess this shot consists of numerous shots/exposures or else you couldn't get the details in the fireplace as well as the outside buildings...

If not, then I'm confused about how you achieved this

How many exposures?

 

[ann]

ah, that clears up the question.

 

[Light Artisan]

WTF, for almost 2 years now I thought it was Photomatrix too - and I've owned it that long.

 

[GeorgieGirl]

Three shots -2, 0, +2 EV. And I've got to tell you, it was bright out that window. The minute I saw this image, I was a convert to HDR. Now, I almost never shoot anything any other way.

I think that a step that is important is the need to evaluate what the range needs to be, and that might have been overlooked using the fireplace as a dark marker for example.

HDR covers a specific exposure range of bright to the dark. I think you might be partially there, but not entirely with this effort. Read up a bit more and I think you will be even more pleased with your work as you learn to interpret the exposure range required for stunning results.

 

[KongKurs]

WTF, for almost 2 years now I thought it was Photomatrix too - and I've owned it that long.

I second that..
Maybe one could create a thread on the HDR board stating only the breaking news that Photomatrix is spelled without the R

Three shots -2, 0, +2 EV. And I've got to tell you, it was bright out that window. The minute I saw this image, I was a convert to HDR. Now, I almost never shoot anything any other way.

I think that a step that is important is the need to evaluate what the range needs to be, and that might have been overlooked using the fireplace as a dark marker for example.

HDR covers a specific exposure range of bright to the dark. I think you might be partially there, but not entirely with this effort. Read up a bit more and I think you will be even more pleased with your work as you learn to interpret the exposure range required for stunning results.

Question from me being very new to HDR: Does the "middlerange" of the total luminance range get "distorted" or in any way of lesser quality by adding more exposures?

I'm thinking the less repetitions, the better.. But on the other hand, the bigger gaps between exposures, the less information to process.. I guess there's a balace to be found in this..?

 

[ann]

It is my experience that the more exposures the better. However, if you mean a dupe , then no.

THe number of expoures will be determined by the dynamic range. THe rule of thumb may be 3, but that is a guide line.

My images are made with 1/3 stops, going both ways until the entire range is covered. Others may work differently, but that is what i had determined gives me what i want. That usually means at least 7 expsoures but mostly 9-13

 

[GeorgieGirl]

Three shots -2, 0, +2 EV. And I've got to tell you, it was bright out that window. The minute I saw this image, I was a convert to HDR. Now, I almost never shoot anything any other way.

I think that a step that is important is the need to evaluate what the range needs to be, and that might have been overlooked using the fireplace as a dark marker for example.

HDR covers a specific exposure range of bright to the dark. I think you might be partially there, but not entirely with this effort. Read up a bit more and I think you will be even more pleased with your work as you learn to interpret the exposure range required for stunning results.

After I took my first image (above) and saw the possibilities, I read Ferrell McCollough's "Complete Guide Hight Dynamic Range Digital Photography". This book is about as clear as a book gets, and the illustrations are beautiful. I have followed his guidelines for both exposure and post-processing in all of my subsequent work.

Without wanting to appear obnoxious, I passed on that book, didn;t think it was quite enough. What I do think was a good book on the topic is "Practical HDR - A Guide to Creating High Dynamic Range images with your SLR" by David Nightengale. Step by Step and then gets into how to process in Photomatix (FDR Tools and Photoshop too) and Lightroom step by step.

HDR image work does not end in Photomatix.

 

[ann]

I would second the McCollough book, it is very good. The Nightingale book is also valuable. It is very helpful to see how he constructive images and compares various software.

There are several good books available and of course some that are ok , but a little "light" in indepth information. Viewing more than one method and thought process can only imho be a good thing.

One major issue I find, too many people want to just push a button and have the software do all the work. The software is just a tool and needs to be controled just as the camera and just as our vision needs to be educated and refined to produce work of value. That all takes practice and lots of footwork, not just a piece of software.

 

[GeorgieGirl]

I would second the McCollough book, it is very good. The Nightingale book is also valuable. It is very helpful to see how he constructive images and compares various software.

There are several good books available and of course some that are ok , but a little "light" in indepth information. Viewing more than one method and thought process can only imho be a good thing.

One major issue I find, too many people want to just push a button and have the software do all the work. The software is just a tool and needs to be controled just as the camera and just as our vision needs to be educated and refined to produce work of value. That all takes practice and lots of footwork, not just a piece of software.

That's why I just bought a spot meter so I can be much more acccurate in my range evaluation. Three brackets are not going to pass muster for a stunning HDR. IMHO of course.

 

[ann]

Nothing wrong with a spot meter, i use one from time to time with HDR, but mainly for LF work. However, you can also use the histogram and be sure your exposures are going from shoulder to shoulder.