Starting with HDR

[NielsSw]

I'm pretty new to HDR and I need to learn a lot. Maybe you can help me with that by commenting on these 2 shots i made.

I know how to put a HDR image together but i'm never sure where to look at and what things to notice that are bad. I've read a couple of tutorials about it but I'm still rather unsure..

1 (from 4 photo's)

2 (from 3 photo's)

 

[SlickSalmon]

Looks to me like you've got the idea. You've even succeeded in keeping the scenes looking real, which is often the big downfall for first-timers. You've got blown pixels in the second shot, because 1) it's difficult for a camera to correctly meter a shot like this and 2) you've got the image of a light source (streetlamp) in the scene, which greatly expands the dynamic range. But you managed to keep the noise down in the sky, which is a big plus. You probably needed an additional underexposure for this shot. But all-in-all I'd say you succeeded!

 

[NielsSw]

thanks. Yeah I would have needed one more for the lights, but I just ignored that. (it was freaking cold that night anyway)

 

[tyler_h]

Very pleased when I opened this thread. I prefer the realistic style of applying HDR. Works well in the first image; doesn't appear to be a HDR at all (wondering about original pics for how much it needed HDR treatment).
For the second; definitely one darker, maybe two - any lamps etc tend to be a lot brighter than we think. You'll probably still have blown out sections there but it should be able to help with the blown out band of snow through the middle of the shot.

 

[Polina Rabtseva]

i really like some of his works 500px / Edmondo Senatore

 

[AverageJoe]

I think the first is a very nice shot, however neither of these look HDR, what was the exposure difference between them? What are you processing the images in?

 

[Over Exposed]

I think the first is a very nice shot, however neither of these look HDR

And that, sir, is why they are so nice.

 

[NielsSw]

Very pleased when I opened this thread. I prefer the realistic style of applying HDR. Works well in the first image; doesn't appear to be a HDR at all (wondering about original pics for how much it needed HDR treatment).
For the second; definitely one darker, maybe two - any lamps etc tend to be a lot brighter than we think. You'll probably still have blown out sections there but it should be able to help with the blown out band of snow through the middle of the shot.

Thank you Yes very true about the band of snow, I didn't think of that part. I knew the lights would be too bright but after a few failed shots (cars driving by) I decided to walk on and just let the lights be too bright because I am used to that in my normal pictures. But the snow would have been nice to have proper lighting.

I think the first is a very nice shot, however neither of these look HDR, what was the exposure difference between them? What are you processing the images in?

The normal exposed and hdr picture do have quite a difference even though I could have been satisfied with only the normal exposure. I think my decision to try it in hdr came from how I saw it when I was there. I used 3 shots; normal, +2, and -2 and process it in Photoshop cs5. I've read that photomatrix is better?

I think the first is a very nice shot, however neither of these look HDR

And that, sir, is why they are so nice.

Thank you