Sunrise, please C&C

[ceejtank]

I got Adobe Photoshop Elements 9 and Photomatix Pro 4.1.1.

I'd suggest using the faux HDR process I provided you above then. Use elements to lighten the picture (i usually check 30, 60, 90, 120 to see whcih ones I like better) then use photomatix to merge. I'll link one of my shots that I did this to. One image, turned into 3 using the technique above. Turned out well, wasn't overly dark, was just dark on the right side of hte building.

"Motif #1" by CJ Fuchs | RedBubble This was originally 1 image on my point and shoot camera... but using the method I described above, I turned it into a fake HDR, and then made it painterly in photomatix, and touched it up in Photoshop cs3 + topaz labs.

 

[ceejtank]

Those were taken in RAW + JPEG formats, so HDR may be the solution.

But how am I going to do HDR when the sun is rising rapidly? Wouldn't there be ghosting?

IMO For an HDR done properly you need at least 3 images of various exposures which you do not have. Sun rising should be slow enough were you wouldnt notice any ghosting. I have done an hdr of waves crashing on the beach without noticing ghosting. I dont think hdr would make #1 or #2 a better photo. There isnt enough detail in them to justify hdr. I like #1 once it has been cropped.

if he has it in raw he can adjust the white balance of it up and down, to make 3 images. it's one of the benefits of shooting in RAW.

 

[markv20]

Those were taken in RAW + JPEG formats, so HDR may be the solution.

But how am I going to do HDR when the sun is rising rapidly? Wouldn't there be ghosting?

IMO For an HDR done properly you need at least 3 images of various exposures which you do not have. Sun rising should be slow enough were you wouldnt notice any ghosting. I have done an hdr of waves crashing on the beach without noticing ghosting. I dont think hdr would make #1 or #2 a better photo. There isnt enough detail in them to justify hdr. I like #1 once it has been cropped.

if he has it in raw he can adjust the white balance of it up and down, to make 3 images. it's one of the benefits of shooting in RAW.

You are right, I wasnt even thinking of that. Still I dont think it would make either 1 or 2 a better image. #1 once cropped is a good photo imo. HDR may help #3 because of the detail with the clouds

 

[ceejtank]

IMO For an HDR done properly you need at least 3 images of various exposures which you do not have. Sun rising should be slow enough were you wouldnt notice any ghosting. I have done an hdr of waves crashing on the beach without noticing ghosting. I dont think hdr would make #1 or #2 a better photo. There isnt enough detail in them to justify hdr. I like #1 once it has been cropped.

if he has it in raw he can adjust the white balance of it up and down, to make 3 images. it's one of the benefits of shooting in RAW.

You are right, I wasnt even thinking of that. Still I dont think it would make either 1 or 2 a better image. #1 once cropped is a good photo imo. HDR may help #3 because of the detail with the clouds

I don't know.. it might be interesting to see a little bit of the details of the trees. Could come out great.. could come out terrible.. thats the great thing about digital cameras and editing.. you can always delete. :thumbup:

 

[markv20]

if he has it in raw he can adjust the white balance of it up and down, to make 3 images. it's one of the benefits of shooting in RAW.

You are right, I wasnt even thinking of that. Still I dont think it would make either 1 or 2 a better image. #1 once cropped is a good photo imo. HDR may help #3 because of the detail with the clouds

I don't know.. it might be interesting to see a little bit of the details of the trees. Could come out great.. could come out terrible.. thats the great thing about digital cameras and editing.. you can always delete. :thumbup:

True, couldnt hurt to try I guess