Would this work for movement in HDR??


TPF Noob!
Aug 17, 2010
Reaction score
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Hi all, my first post!

Ill get straight to the point!

When HDR'ing images the norm is to take 3 or more bracketed shots and combine them etc however this wouldnt be practical for moving shots or perhaps bands etc...

What if I take a decent RAW shot, open it in the converter and save 3 different version of the same image? one normal, one underexposed by -2 and one over by +2 before combining them in the same way??

I guess I could have tried this before asking but it just popped into my head.

any thoughts?

regards, K
flash is correct on both points.

what you get ,using that method has more to do with the tone mapping part of the process, which you can do without making 3 sperate files,however, you would need the proper software.

the issue becomes using the "proper" technique for the situation, so if one can take one image and cover the expoure range then it doesn't need "HDR".

and to your orginal thought, some programs work better with movement than others, but much movement is a real problem.

there really isn't thing wrong imo, if you wish to take an image an apply your vision which may include tone mapping, after all it is your vision, it becomes a matter of using the correct terms ;or that is my opinion for what that's worth..
thank you.... I am fairly new to the technique but I must admit I dont particularly like HDR without tone mapping and what I have gone on to do is to unsharp mask the HDR'd shot to get a very 'Dave Hill' style shot. Some people I know dont like this but I do and I know the results I get I do like. I was hoping to do some band shots and have them very tone mapped and over produced but I want to start with HDR as my knowledge of PS is not good enough to begin without it :-(
HDR is a very abused and misunderstood term.

Many believe that HDR allows them to increase the tonal range of their photos. If your final target is a print then there's nothing you can do to make black ink blacker or white paper whiter. That tonal range is fixed. HDR allows you to digitally manipulate the tonal distribution visible in the photo. There are many ways to accomplish this.

I started making HDR images the minute Photoshop adopted layers back in version 3 (fifteen years ago).

Here's one:


The original is a b$w negative. Any attempt to scan the film and not blow out the highlights in the blouse resulted in an empty black void on top of her head. So I scanned the negative twice and blended the two scans together.

Here's the RAW capture idea that started this post:


The top photo is the camera's image processed JPEG. I forced a -.7 exposure comp to make sure I captured the sky. The boat and water are moving and so multiple exposures wouldn't work. The RAW file captured sufficient tonal information which I extracted into multiple layers and blended to produce the final image. The key to success in all this is to maintain an appearance of normal contrast in the final result.

Yes I think that perhaps I have jumped on the bandwagon of the trend to like HDR and perhaps what you say is right and I should look at it from a different angle, however, I do like the shots I have been able to produce so far. I have the posted the below in the beginners forum but perhaps you could comment. Thanks again.

Most reactions