Hdr

Bachs

Bachs

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,559
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Has anyone had a play with HDR (High Dynamic Range) in Photoshop CS2 yet?
The HDR tool takes several bracketed shots and merges them into a single 32 bit image and allows you to extract a wide range of tones from the darkest shadows to the brightest highlights to create the perfect, noiseless image.

I find the CS2 tool a little cumbersome and have just bought this application called Photomatix which is much more automated, with amazing results.
No more dodging and burning!
 
Looks like a good tool you've found there Steve.:thumb:

Will give it a try once I have something to put into it.
 
Did try it quickly on shot of inside of Garden Room with views of garden. Didn't seem to work ....complained of ranges out or something. Gave in, in the end. Will have a look at the App you mention
 
DJW said:
Did try it quickly on shot of inside of Garden Room with views of garden. Didn't seem to work ....complained of ranges out or something. Gave in, in the end. Will have a look at the App you mention
Click to expand...

I suspect you tried to import adjusted RAW images from your convertor which doesnt work...it has to be direct unedited shots from the camera.

Even auto-bracketing using the cameras' built in facility isn't that suitable.
It works best by manually bracketing outside the range of the auto-bracketing...in a mode that keeps the same aperture of course.
You can use as little as 2 shots or around 7 shots and you will capture every bit of tonality. In CS2's HDR, the localised adjustment option works the best as it presents a curve tool to enable you to tweak in the full range.
 
Nah, it was with JPEG versions of photos. Basically I took the RAW shot & under exposed 1 & saved as JPEG , then over exposed another from RAW & saved again as JPEG. I get the message "not enough dynamic range to proccess" .

Anyway downloaded trial version of S/W you mentioned. Has worked perfectly for shots of the house eg:-

GardenRoomHDR800pixels.jpg


Not sure how good it would be for more general shots though ... sometimes it seems to lighten / darken the wrong part.

Anyway found that trial vsn works perfectly with 2 images, & if you want more it just adds some basic embossing of "trial version" across small part if image. Not much of a detterent though for those who don't want to pay as you can keep processing until the random position of lettering is in a crop area or easy area to clone out....... not that I condone that of course :whistling
 
The CS2 HDR feature reads the EXIF data in the file. The simple way round the problem with using a RAW file, is simply to save the rendered files as JPEGS using "Save for the web" before trying to combine them. This strips out the EXIF data and will allow you to perform the HDR merge.

I found it to be slow, awkward and pretty useless though to be honest.

Matt
 
KenCo1964 said:
Using Photomatix from your jpeg.
Click to expand...
Thats the S/W I used to get the result .....cripes looks like your version has been "Changing Room'd" :lol: ;)
 
i quite like the effect that Kens software gives on landscapes, not quite so effective insode though!
 
Jonny said:
Wayyyyyyy oversharpened, looks over processed and fake :(
Click to expand...
Hardly unless DJW done the sharpening, as all I done was resized. I never did any processing to the image apart from photomatix and even then, I set everything to 100% to over do the effect, only cos DJW said "It didn't seem to work". This is from the 1 jpg and not multiple exposures raw files....I also use the photomatix program AND NOT the plugin. I feel the program has a better feel to it.
 
My mention of not working was related to CS2 HDR.

Out of interest KenCo1964 did you use HDRI -> Generate HDR ? I tried that option on some shots that gave a very dramatic result...similar to yours above. I used "Combine" -> "H&S Details - 2 Images" to get the result I posted....which was most natural result I could gain.

I also use stand alone pgm version .....still in trial mode.
 
Guys, don't lose sight of the wood for the trees. :)

All I've done is added a little contrast to DJW's pic which I thought it needed despite all this fancy manipulation.

GardenRoomHDR800pixels.jpg


I haven't seen the original pic so I don't know to what degree it was problematic, but it's perfectly natural to have a lower light level indoors than you would see outside.

These advanced techniques are fine for the problem images but don't make them a way of life. I shoot jpegs a lot of the time and in the main, the only adjustments I make are for good shadow detail with no loss of highlights, good saturation and contrast. When you can't get that, then it's tiime to start thinking about further processing techniques.

In difficult light - snow scenes etc, I'll shoot RAW, but I dont want to spend hours in front of the PC when I don't need to. RAW processing is a powerful tool, which has big advatages, but I'd highly recommend you start shooting a few jpegs just to see how many of your shots can't be sorted by quite simple adjustments in PS et al without recourse to all these techniques. We're photographers primarily and the processing should be complimentary to that - dont go putting the cart before the horse.:)
 
Hi Dave, no I used a feature in photomatix called tone mapping, hdr is for multiple exposures, whereas tone mapping can be used on a single exposure as long as it is 16bit. So I had to convert your image to a 16bit tiff before I could use the program and then convert back to jpg to upload.
I don't know if this has been posted before...but this site show examples of both photomatix and cs2 HDR results. HERE
 
Cheers Ken...great link. Swings & Roundabouts come to mind with the results .... sometimes CS2 has more natural results, where as Photomatix is more vivid in others ...IMO

Have to admit the latter wins though in ease of operation.
 
As I said I set everything to 100% this is at 25%

I don't use it all the time but on some shots I like the effect that it gives....I know some of you won't...but then I don't like Marmite! ;) :lol:
 
I don't like Marmite on its own (spread on toast or something), but I put a dollop of it in my sstock when I'm making gravy or a stew. Makes a lovely difference.
 
Marmite on a piece of cheese for me.....try it :)
 
CT said:
I haven't seen the original pic so I don't know to what degree it was problematic, but it's perfectly natural to have a lower light level indoors than you would see outside.

These advanced techniques are fine for the problem images but don't make them a way of life.
Click to expand...

Missed your post there CT. Living in a cottage without a decent flash makes for fun trying to shoot indoor shots without either ending with very dark interior & correct light for windows, or correct interior with huge white glow from windows. Final results are all here :- http://www.stable-cottage-details.co.uk/ (Got fed up with Estate Agents limited shots , so set this up for him to point to from details....... why am I paying so much for fees :Ponders: ....ok knocked them down to 1%, but still too much ;) )

I think the Kitchen is a classic example where very small windows defintely needed this process to gain acceptable results.

But on the whole agree with you CT, that only in exception cases would I use this S/W.
 
DJW said:
Marmite on a piece of cheese for me.....try it :)
Click to expand...

You are absoloutley spot on. Been doing that for a good few years, and its made me the women I am today ;)

Matt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top