BeforeAttachment 35626
Attachment 35625
AfterAttachment 35624
Attachment 35623
Printable View
HDR is awesome but the real trick is to figure out when and where to use it.
ditto that
Long story short some scenes really work with HDR and others dont.
Try finding some reflections, dark clouds, or abandoned cars...
"Rusty and Crusty" always looks good in HDR.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2435/...18881a10_z.jpg
HDR works great for reflections and dark sunset.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3484/...6749501d_z.jpg
Long time poster, first time in the Dark Room.
Is there a program where I can take my RAW files and monkey with them directly to get jpegs across the exposure range I want?
Tom
Dang, I am worse than an amature. I don't know how to do HDR. Digital photography is like golf for me. I am not yet good enough to suck. :haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Barron
Not sure exactly what you're asking.Quote:
Originally Posted by ratagonia
I shoot in RAW and make local exposure adjustments all the time with LR3 and export as a jpeg.
....or are you talking about creating a pseudo HDR image form a single RAW exposure?
HDR starting popping up in the 1850's :haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Card
Here is a little bit about RAW...
http://richardbarron.net/cameras/201...ible-raw-file/
I could be wrong, but I don't think you can use a single RAW to get a HDR style print. You might be a able to push pull the single raw to a bottom exposure, do a save as, and then repeat this step by using the original Raw to then make a High exposure and save as. In the end you'll have used a single Raw "properly exposed" to make two or three bracketed shots that you would then turn into a HDR style print. I've not tried it, but I doubt it would be as good as really taking the bracketed shots on location.
The bottom line to question is, every film, or sensor has a limit to it's range of stops it can use to take a picture. So when yo expose for the mountain and the bright sky is several stops lighter it gets blown out. (No details recorded, just white.) No amount of tricking, even with a raw will bring that detail back.Quote:
Originally Posted by ratagonia
I think if you just import RAW directly into photomatix is pretty much does that for you.... I have messed around plenty with tonemapping single RAW files into fake HDR images with mixed results. yeah... it works but you will never have the same amount of dynamic range from 1 file RAW the you will get form 3+Quote:
Originally Posted by archbishop
http://www.hdrsoft.com/support/help_files/raws.htm
Working with RAW files When you select RAW files to generate the HDR image, Photomatix will show additional options on the "Generate HDR" dialog: - White Balance: By default, Photomatix will use the "As Shot" White Balance (the one read in the Exif metadata) when converting the RAW data to HDR. You can adjust the White Balance by selecting a pre-defined white balance or specify the color temperature in Kelvin. A preview lets you see the effect of the change on the source image. You can configure the default white balance in the Default Options. - Color primaries: The RAW data are in a color space specific to the camera. Photomatix will convert the data into a standardized color space, by default Adobe RGB, but you can select sRGB or ProPhoto RGB instead. It is important to note that the selected color space is used for its color primaries only, and not for its tone reproduction curve. Since HDR image are in linear space, they do not have a tone curve. The tone curve of the profile associated with the image will only be applied in the tone mapping step, and never to the HDR image itself. Photomatix also allows you to process a single RAW file into an image stored with a 32-bit HDR image format. Please note though that an image created with a single RAW file can not really be considered High Dynamic Range. It is a rather a pseudo-HDR image. The important characteristics of this pseudo-HDR image is that it is unprocessed. Its dynamic range however is not much different from the range of an already converted file. If you want to produce a "real" HDR image, you will need to combine differently exposed shots. One issue caused by the relatively low dynamic range available in a single RAW file is that the pseudo-HDR image will often be noisy. To achieve a lower noise level, we recommend exposing for the shadows when taking the RAW image, i.e. to overexpose your shot. Even though the histogram of your camera may indicate that the highlights will be lost, you should still be able to recover them during RAW conversion -- unless the dynamic range of the scene is too high, but then a single RAW will not be sufficient and you would need to take multiple exposures.
Yes - the best workflow program I would suggest would be Adobe Lightroom - it will take your raws directly and you can monkey with them a lot (adjust white balance, adjust exposure, etc) and you can even do more powerful things (gradient filters, local dodging and burning, etc). It's got a nice interface and it does it all non-destructively. When you are done with your adjustments, you can just say "export" and spit out a JPG with those changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by ratagonia
You can get a trial of Lightroom to play with from Adobe (I think it's 30 days, maybe its 90 days) and see how you like it. IMHO it's got a very intuitive flow and it's pretty fast.
Ryan
About HDR - I've been playing with HDR Expose by Unified Color recently. In my opinion it has some great features. I particularly like the halo-artifact removal it has for its different adjustments - which help get rid of that nasty glow that often comes with local contrast adjustments in HDR images that screams "HI, I'M AN OVERPROCESSED HDR IMAGE"
It's got a 30 day trial. If you act fast, they have a photo contest you can submit stuff to (although TODAY is the deadline, so you'll have to act really fast).
HDR Expose's features that I think make it worth using: Halo artifact removal in both brightness / contrast and shadow / highlight adjustment modes & Veiling glare removal. Its crop feature sucks, the rotate feature sucks, the interface is kind of clunky - but it does a really good job at what it does well.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/...b6dd3683_d.jpg
Thats one that I processed in HDR Expose that was particularly challenging to get right in Photoshop or Photomatix. It still looks a bit processed, but the greatly-reduced halos around the farm thing help I think.
In any case, it's a program worth checking out if you are into HDR.
Ryebrye, that is a really sweet photo. :2thumbs:
Here are a few of my DR attempts. I love the effects using Grunge work flow.
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo...eat=directlink
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo...eat=directlink
ttp://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/...eat=directlink
Yes Photomatrix works great for a single Raw file. See my example below
http://picasaweb.google.com/PaulFrnS...23859764358130
Ditto that:cry1:Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Card