Nik HDR Pro 2 - any tips ???

DG Phototraining

DG Phototraining

Woof
Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,064
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all

I've just been trying out the HDR Pro 2 from the Nik collection and frankly I'm struggling to see the point as I always end up with a far noisier image than simply pushing one image offers

For the testing - I've shot, on a tripod and handheld too, 3 bracketed RAW files as -1.7, 0, +1.7 of a variety of subjects which I then turn into PSDs, still 16-bit

The auto-alignment does a cracking job of the handheld ones I must say, and the ghost removal works very well too, its when getting to the Tone Mapping stage that I keep ending up with end results that seem far more noisy in the shadow areas than simply processing the '0' gives me. Its pretty much as if there's no point to shooting the bracketed 3 at all as my single RAW files have lots of dynamic range anyway

I'm not looking for the hyper-HDR effects btw, just something that raises the overall tonal range to perhaps slightly above what the eye sees and gives a little 'pop'

Thanks for any hints :)

Dave
 
Expand the dynamic range... +1.7 isn't really that excessive, so any shadow detail recovered from that will be noisy once detail extraction and micro contrast come into play.

HDR always makes things a little noisier though... although done well (not the retarded over the top stuff) it shouldn't be excessive.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your reply :)

I previously watched a very lengthy tutorial online where the tutor clearly stated there's no point in shooting more than 3 images anymore and that he only shoots a 4 stop range now too (so -2, 0, +2) as a max; his argument being that modern cameras' dynamic range was so high it was pointless to shoot & merge more than that

Years ago I regularly shot a 9 stop range and always had very noisy results then too, but the HDR software was much crappier than now - maybe I am just expecting too much ???

Dave
 
Try Photomatix instead, I only use 2 stops each way and I get great results with it, I had loads of problems with Niks offering, just getting it to work at all took 4 computers and a lot of hassle.
 
DG Phototraining said:
Thanks for your reply :)

I previously watched a very lengthy tutorial online where the tutor clearly stated there's no point in shooting more than 3 images anymore and that he only shoots a 4 stop range now too (so -2, 0, +2) as a max; his argument being that modern cameras' dynamic range was so high it was pointless to shoot & merge more than that

Years ago I regularly shot a 9 stop range and always had very noisy results then too, but the HDR software was much crappier than now - maybe I am just expecting too much ???

Dave
Click to expand...


People see these dynamic range figures and think that's the camera's latitude.... it's not.. it's the total dynamic range from deepest shadows to brightest highlights. So let's take a common example, like a Canon 5D MkIII.. which has about 12 stops dynamic range... so roughly 6 stops either way (although it will be biased to shadow rather than highlight.. but lets keep the example simple). Normally, detail in the shadows which will rest at the bottom of the dynamic range will be dark, and it's meant to be dark, but what the HDR process is trying to achieve is to bring this shadow detail out, and shift it much further up the tonal scale. Anything 5-6 stops under the mid tones in your shot would normally be very dark.. if you lighten those tones, they'll also reveal the noise floor as they are so close to the limit of the range. If you want noise free shadow detail, you'd probably need to be creating an exposure set roughly +4 over the ensure that stuff that was normally nestling just above the noise floor is sufficiently up the scale to stand being processed noise free.

As for over exposure, then yes... he's right.. in most cases a -2 stop limit at the top would suffice... but I'd still do a -4 just to keep a balanced set and take care of any little bright hot spots.

The tutor in question clearly needs to brush up on how exactly digital cameras work. Then again, it never fails to shock me what people accept as high quality these days.

You will always get more noise from HDR though, but it's normally due to the detail extraction/clarity and micro contrast adjustments that are part of the tone mapping process. You have to remember... what you end up with is NOT a high dynamic range image at all, but a tone-mapped rendition of one. A true HDR image is 32bits in depth (or more) and can't really be viewed, printed or seen in any real sense, as no printers, or screens exist that can display the dynamic range or depth. Even the most high end screens are 10bit colour depth and around 600:1 contrast ratio (any figures listed higher than this are probably using some lame-assed software driving dynamic contrast system), and the dynamic range of most printers is a fraction of most screens.
 
Last edited:
I've never felt it necessary to expose more than three images at 2 stops spacing when using Nik. However, I treat the result from HDR Pro as the starting point for my final image. I always return it to LR or Elements for final processing, sometimes both. The finished articles have never suffered from excessive noise even when printed at A3.
 
Yellowbelly said:
I've never felt it necessary to expose more than three images at 2 stops spacing when using Nik. However, I treat the result from HDR Pro as the starting point for my final image. I always return it to LR or Elements for final processing, sometimes both. The finished articles have never suffered from excessive noise even when printed at A3.
Click to expand...

That's what occurred to me yesterday !!! I think I got a little carried away with all the presets thinking that was giving me the end result, but really they are best ignored and (as you say) just used to create a starter image

Cheers

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