*HELP* Can this pic be done without HDR?

Hammerhead64

Hammerhead64

Suspended / Banned
Messages
726
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
I've read with interest other thread's on the like and dislike of HDR and would be most intrigued to find out if the pic #3 is possible without the use of HDR? If so what sort of settings would be needed? :help:

#1 My pic exposed for the sky
3232349194_568ef4506e_o.jpg


#2 My pic exposed for wooden seat and ground
3232349350_70b6223a96_o.jpg


#3 And finally the HDR image ..... (I forgot to take the VR off so it looks a bit OOF)
3232349104_071784c14c_o.jpg


I took about 20 shots of this but could not get one I was totally happy with except the final HDR done with Photomatix.

Any help and C&C would be most useful as I feel a bit uncomfortable using P&P except in the most extreme needs this being one.

Thanks for looking :thumbs:
 
How about using ND grad filters? Not got out to play with mine yet, but you should be able to expose for the bench and the sky will darken with the filter.

Sure someone will come round soon with much better ideas!!
 
:thumbs: ... a very good solution but I was looking for more of a in camera settings solution on the account that my Cokin ND Grad filter does not fit my Nikon 18-200mm lens. I also wonder if putting another thing in front can ruin the pic somewhat? Thx for the idea :clap:
 
what's wrong with the HDR shot? it's quite nice and didn;t take too long either i would suspect?

But if exposed in between #1 and #2 more towards #2, ie meter it off the bench and lock that in, and then take the shot, are u not happy to add an overlay with top half being completely black and that will darken the sky up...as per this link

what series is the filter? P series can fit 18-200 and u need another adaptor ring maybe?
 
nothing wrong with the hdr, flash would probably be easiest answer to brighten the foreground
 
I would put #1 on a layer above #3 and use a gradient mask and lowered opcaity to blend the sky. The foreground works OK. HDR is just another technique where you can get another version to put in the mix. :thumbs:
 
If you are happy with the HDR version that is all that matters.
 
Nikon version of IS(image stabilisation)
 
Wow ...thx for the comments everyone :thumbs:


Bazza155 said:
If you are happy with the HDR version that is all that matters.
Click to expand...

I am happy with the HDR as this was very close to my memory of the scene. However I am aware that HDR does not always appeal to the audience as debated quite a lot just in these forums. So I was hoping for some feedback on how someone who dislikes HDR would have overcome the problem. If there is a way and bearing in mind my limited camera bag equipment?

HIMUPNORTH said:
I would put #1 on a layer above #3 and use a gradient mask and lowered opcaity to blend the sky. The foreground works OK. HDR is just another technique where you can get another version to put in the mix. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

I will give this a go to see what the difference to the final pic is.... :thumbs:

Flash In The Pan said:
A couple of spots of

npbb_p1.jpg


and it will, works a treat ;)
Click to expand...

..... doesn't it get in the way ? or it seems a lot of cloning may be needed ? :D

fletch5 said:
nothing wrong with the hdr, flash would probably be easiest answer to brighten the foreground
Click to expand...

...... the best answer IMHO and I may be able to borrow an SB800 to try as I aim to revisit weather permitting so I can get ALL the settings correct this time :bang:

ricky1980 said:
what's wrong with the HDR shot? it's quite nice and didn;t take too long either i would suspect?

But if exposed in between #1 and #2 more towards #2, ie meter it off the bench and lock that in, and then take the shot, are u not happy to add an overlay with top half being completely black and that will darken the sky up
what series is the filter? P series can fit 18-200 and u need another adaptor ring maybe?
Click to expand...

thx :thumbs: ..... for the feedback and will try a gradient mask. I do have a both adaptors but only a ND8 for the P Series.
 
I think HDR doesn't appeal when it becomes like a cartoon or console games graphics type. Used in moderation it's ok and can produce some good, interesting results.

Me I'd have taken the shots and merged them with layers in photoshop, perhaps using the eraser tool etc.
 
Personally I really don't like the HDR, the foreground is brighter than the sky and it displays lots of halos.

I overlaid the foreground image selected highlights feathered and deleted the selection. Then just adjusted opacity and levels to merge the images together.

3233794433_bd7f21b110_o.jpg
 
Nice edit mole2k ...although I'm not sure there are exessive Halos in the HDR... and I think that the foreground of your edit needs to be a tad brighter.... but I totally agree on the edited version of the sky being far better than that produced in the HDR. :thumbs: thx for the C&C and taking the time to edit.
 
Hammerhead64 said:
Nice edit mole2k ...although I'm not sure there are exessive Halos in the HDR... and I think that the foreground of your edit needs to be a tad brighter.... but I totally agree on the edited version of the sky being far better than that produced in the HDR. :thumbs: thx for the C&C and taking the time to edit.
Click to expand...

It's mostly the halo that's down in the water reflection near the grass that gets me and the fact that some parts of the light shining on the ground are several stops brighter than the sky itself. An image will usually look fairly fake if you get the balance between the sky and the ground wrong. It can even be done in-camera if you use too strong a graduating ND filter and bring the sky down to the same level or lower than the ground and the image starts to look wrong because it's not what your eyes are used to seeing. With HDR it is very very easy for this to happen and it's the main thing I see that I consider wrong with a lot of HDR's.

I left the shadows fairly dark in my first edit to try and go for a more natural look, I've had another go at trying to bring out the detail a bit more but it's getting to the un-natural point and there is noticable halo's in the grass region. Generally for some reason can get away with more in B&W also then you don't have the colour mis-matches that I've tried to correct for. (shadows are colder than the rest of the image, in extreme cases I've even had to import two different images and manually blended them to have correct white balance across the image.) Reaching the limits of an 8bit compressed jpeg so there is noticeable banding but this wouldn't be an issue with the original raws.

3235198086_3265a4fcb1_o.jpg


3235198848_90ae6d850e_o.jpg
 
Maybe in the future, think about the light levels at the time of day? It does look like a very bright time of day, would be better to shoot late afternoon when the light is softer, use a tripod, and experiment with shutter times and ISO's.

Also you can always change things better if you are shooting in RAW, and even do two RAW conversions - one for the sky, one for the subject, then use a layer mask in Photoshop.

Also are you shooting in manual and spot metering? That would give you much more control in camera.

I always use bracketing and then layer masks rather than HDR software to produce an HDR image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top