HDR image 1st try--HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

[Seedy]

I shot about 5 gigs of skyline/sunset shots today...

...I'm going blind rasterbating the curves in CS2 when I downsample from 32 to 16 bit...I'm gonna have to try photomatrix...

 

[Seedy]

Took a buncha pics today:

 

[Nanotech9]

ok my turn!

These were both done using Photoshop CS5's HDR photomerge... The Tesla is the first one i've ever tried.

On of the cars my work owns. I didn't take the shots specifically for HDR, but noticed i had several under and over exposed trying to get a specific shot. I also moved my three remote flashes between exposures...

[Broken External Image]



This one I shot in front of the SW corner of the Chase tower in bricktown. I've done some slight editing to take some things out that i didn't want in the image as it was being used in my company calendar... but the majority of it is as shot / HDR'ed

[Broken External Image]

 

[Seedy]

Very cool cars and images nanotech9

I've got a copy of photomatix pro 4.0 now and have been comparing my results from "local adaptation and tone mapping via curves in CS2 and the "auto-ish" tone mapping of photomatix...

Here's what I've noticed so far:

1) One can get almost the exact same results with either program...its going to be more intensive and take longer in CS2.

2) I still prefer to edit my raw images is CS2 (synch temperatures, contrast, saturation, etc) before using Photomatix to merge the RAW files to HDR.

3) if you really understand the concept of "high dynamic range" and the math and the way the RAW data is handled AND you are good at working the curves when downsampling from 32 to 16bit (via local adaptation in photoshop) then you will most likely prefer Photoshop for HDR.

4)Photomatix is really easy for the average person to create really stunning (but very "processed") looking images.

5) Depending on if I want a "more realistic" (ie what my eyes actually saw) or a "less subtle" more processed look (which can be more spectacular than what my eye saw) will determine if I merge and downsample via CS2 or via Photomatix.

I will post some comparision images from the same source photos merged and downsampled in each program to let y'all be the judge.

Disclaimer: I am not a professional photographer, I just play one on the internet...and YMMV.

 

[Seedy]

OK I have to say that Photoshop + Photomatix produced much better results than just photoshop

Both:

CS2 only:

 

[Seedy]

A couple more:

 

[Nanotech9]

those last two are looking better...!

 

[dennishoddy]

I think it would be fun to turn this thread into "how to" HDR.

.

Yeah! I love to take pics, and have a good SLR if it will take these kind of pics.

 

[Seedy]

Yes it will Dennis. The 1st step is to take several "bracketed" photos only changing the EV by changing the shitter speed.

Step 2 is to use a program to compile the images into a 32 bit image.

Once you have the 32 bit image you have to "downsample" to 16 bit (this is where photomatix vs Photoshop comes in) there are several ways to do this. If you read the link above link where I said "this is how I do it" it will give you a basic understanding of how high dynamic range images work

 

[KOPBET]

... only changing the EV by changing the shitter speed.

That's usually what I do.