 - Carlton Ward  Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
HDR images
I just bought Photomatix http://www.hdrsoft.com/ and have attempted a couple of images and am not getting the results I want. I have seen several images online that look 3D, vibrant & detailed and am curious if these images are created by Photomatix alone or if they are made using this with another program (like NIK or DFX) to get this effect. Any Photomatix or HDR users out there that would care to share their thoughts on this will be much appreciated.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
W. |
"am not getting the results I want." What results DO you want, Carlton? What don't you like about your photo? What would you like different? And how? If that was your first effort it doesn't look half bad, imo! I'd maybe like to twaddle the colour temperature a bit, but that's personal.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Connie J. Bagot |
I think you need more variation in the exposure for the photos that you put in. 2 stops would be better than 1/3 stop. At least one shot should be highly over exposed and at least one shot should be very underexposed. Some reading I have done suggest shots ranging 1 fstop apart both up and down, from the metered exposure. This would require 5 to 7 shots to fully cover the range needed. The over exposed shots give information in the shadows and the underexposed shots give the program information in the highlights. I like your shot---the blue/gold contrast is really appealing to me. There are a lot of possible software adjustments within the Photomatix program....playing with variations over a lot of images will help you get the results you want. The website probably has more detail as well.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
W, remind me to send you some sunscreen & sunglasses. Your current pic just cracks me up everytime I see it. I believe I didn't have enough variation in the exposure range and it came out a little dark & I was trying to get a more 3D effect. I just downloaded Photomatix and was getting a bit frustrated trying to find a decent tutorial to explain some of the sliders & controls and how they affected the image. I finally did find a couple to get me going in one direction instead of wandering aimlessly. http://beforethecoffee.wordpress.com/photomatix-tutorial/#comment-2521 I think my image is OK but I more of a 3D effect. I have a few more sets of pics with wider variance that I will try.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Oliver Anderson |
I've not bought the software nor have I attempted the HDR images yet but plan on it and have been commissioned for some San Fran images in HDR....I spent some time researching the method and think you didn't choose an image with enough contrast or maybe you needed to do more than a 1 stop with 3 images shot. I've seen some similar photos of buildings shot in daylight that look best by combining 5 images all 1 stop apart. Can't wait to buy that software and go at it, my client is patient but excited to see the results on the proposed images in HDR...we both tripped out checking out how awesome they look (that whole last sentence is soooo CA).
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
- Ken Smith Contact Ken Smith Ken Smith's Gallery |
You can also shoot a single image in RAW, then save off different exposures and use the HDR software...works pretty good cause I've tried it both ways...single image and process via RAW, versus bracketed exposure.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
W. |
Ken is right! With a latitude of at least 2 stops either way with RAW you can create 5 exposures that are 1 stop apart. Pretty good source material for your HDR image, imo. BTW, that is my – and your! – Neandertal great uncle...
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Oliver Anderson |
I saw your AVI on a Geico commercial...he sucks at Tennis
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
- Bob Cournoyer Contact Bob Cournoyer Bob Cournoyer's Gallery  |
Thanks for the links, Carlton. I've been playing w/Photomatix for a couple weeks.... Bob
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Thanks everyone for your suggestions. I am also going to get some NIK filters to use with the HDR images. I did try a raw image and changed the exposure settings to attempt an HDR image but it didn't come out that well. Its new to me so I guess I will have to learn more to get a feel for what works and how to best use the tools.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Oliver Anderson |
I do love the Nik sharpening filters...a friend gave them to me in exchange for a shoot and they're great.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
John G. Clifford Jr |
I've played with Photomatix, and also with PictureNaut and Zero Noise (Google for the links). Photomatix and PictureNaut work best with at least three images with an exposure range of at least 6 EV (you'd shoot at +3EV, 0EV, and -3EV). Since most dSLRs have a dynamic range of approximately 8 stops, this gives you around 14 stops of information, including much of the areas that in a single exposure are too over- or under-exposed to have detail. Photomatix tends to be more 'saturated' than Picturenaut, but I tend to like the latter better since it really does reflect what the brain visualizes as the eye constantly adjusts from areas of high to low light and back. You can always add saturation in a photo editor. One thing I don't like about Photomatix is the 'halo' around hue/saturation changes; note how photos show a light halo where an object intersects the sky. Picturenaut specifically is engineered not to do this. Zero Noise is a little different in that the goal is to keep the midrange tones while bringing in areas of low and high exposure. What this does is to give a natural-looking image without blown-out highlights or grainy shadows. This program requires only two photos, 4 stops apart, with one photo exposing for the highlights (to not blow them out) and one 4 stops 'brighter' for the shadows. The program uses a unique algorithm that only replaces noise, and the sample images are quite impressive, and natural-looking even in extremely contrasty situations. Note that Picturenaut and Zero Noise are freeware, while Photomatix is a commercial product... with a great evaluation model. So, you can try all three and see which one(s) you like. So far, I like Picturenaut and Zero Noise for what I want to do with images, although Photomatix is also compelling. Your mileage may vary (YMMV).
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
|||||||||||
