HDR Imaging -- Any opinions, tips, etc?

[ski_adk]

Photog mags,

Do any of you use HDR Imaging techniques? I've recently been reading about this technique where you bracket about different half a doze to a dozen F-stops. Next you blend them in PS, or use Bridge to process them.

Does anyone have any suggestions about using this technique? Thanks!

[hemas]

Shoot from a tripod. Works really well for sunset/sunrise scenics.

And no need to shot half a dozen f-stops slower/faster. I often shoot 5 pics with 1 f-stop between (thus I have -2, -1, 0, +1, +2) and then only use what I need (generally 2 or 3 pics).

PS is most likely better for blending (if you can even do it with Bridge).

[dbp]

It seems like a lot of people say Photomatrix produces better results than PS - but I already have PS. I've never done it, but would like to give it a try. You can also produce an HDR using one RAW photo apparently.

Supposedly, you need a special monitor to see what HDR really looks like. I personally don't like the ones that look overdone. The subtle ones that just look like really vibrant photos are kind of cool, or photos where exposure is tricky (e.g., looking out a window).

Even though I just said that I don't like the obvious HDRs, this is one of my favorite photographers on Flickr. He does a lot of HDR and at least some of them are using a single RAW file.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/sets/72057594049344877/

and a couple more of my favorite Flickr HDR photographers:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/valpopando/sets/72157594327558179/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kros/sets/72057594073655609/

[Tippster]

Some amazing stuff...

http://static.flickr.com/67/204476471_bb2066ffaa_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/69/182191565_0537107963_b.jpg

[smalls]

Even though I just said that I don't like the obvious HDRs, this is one of my favorite photographers on Flickr. He does a lot of HDR and at least some of them are using a single RAW file.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/sets/72057594049344877/


this is his tutorial: http://stuckincustoms.com/2006/06/06/548/

[cj001f]

http://www.sjphoto.com/newsletter_october_2003.html#anchor

not quite HDR, but a cool technique nonetheless

[Pura Vida]

Don't over do it.

[AstroPax]

Don't over do it.

Yeah, I agree. The brain knows what normal dynamic range looks like....and too many HDR images look really fake cause they are over-done.

[yesIsaidyes]

It looks like a video game...jesus.

[ski_adk]

Wow, some good links there. Thanks. As for Bridge, it will allow you to gather several images and then opens them in Photoshop where you use their tool to blend them. I haven't had that much luck with it yet, but I'm still working on it. So far, my best results have been using manual blending techniques.

Anyways, heading up to the Uintas for a night, hopefully I'll get some good test shots. If anything's decent, i'll post it up.

[Tippster]

Yeah, I agree. The brain knows what normal dynamic range looks like....and too many HDR images look really fake cause they are over-done.

I like the fact that it doesn't look real. It does kinda look like the world when I was trippin'....

[cj001f]

I like the fact that it doesn't look real. It does kinda look like the world when I was trippin'....

no wonder you like holgas

[midget]

photomatix pro

[Baconzoo]

PS Shadow/Highlight and adding saturation will get you close to these results with a single image. This is photo candy that'll rot your brain....

[Roo]

What I can't quite understand is how they are shooting multiple exposures of fast-moving subjects, such as sea waves and fireworks and then combining them. I can see how it's easy to merge static shots but not rapidly moving ones. Any help here?

[warthog]

What I can't quite understand is how they are shooting multiple exposures of fast-moving subjects, such as sea waves and fireworks and then combining them. I can see how it's easy to merge static shots but not rapidly moving ones. Any help here?

I think it is done with some sort of bracketing, like w/b bracketing. I may be wrong, though.

[BigKuba]

What I can't quite understand is how they are shooting multiple exposures of fast-moving subjects, such as sea waves and fireworks and then combining them. I can see how it's easy to merge static shots but not rapidly moving ones. Any help here?

My guess is that those are the pseudo-HDR shots done with one RAW image, processed multiple times to create a series of files with adjusted exposure +/- ~2 f-stops.

At screen resolution you can really push the exposure far and still get acceptable results, although the second you zoom in anywhere close to 100% you see that this introduces massive amounts of noise. Theoretically you could then treat it with noise-reduction software...

Pretty cool stuff but I'm with PuraVida and AstroPax on this one. I like subtle use of this in difficult lighting situations like sunsets (http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f13/BigKuba2/CRW_8247copy.jpg), but some of this stuff is just overdone, and all overdone in the same way...

[kalisto]

I usually bracket 3 shots... A dozen seems quite a bit, not to mention your computer will shit bricks when it's time to merge them!

In photmatix:
http://www.sfu.ca/~jrp1/pics/marinaGrillSmall.jpg

In PS:
http://www.sfu.ca/~jrp1/pics/downtownBackgroundsmall.jpg

Photomatix:
http://www.sfu.ca/~jrp1/pics/dragonHDR.jpg

[Roo]

I like the fact that it doesn't look real. It does kinda look like the world when I was trippin'....

I'm with Tipp. Although HDR is a useful tool when used subtly for filling in shadow detail, I find the theatrical, super-saturated, slightly plastic-looking pics just jaw-dropping at times.

[Microcosm]

What I can't quite understand is how they are shooting multiple exposures of fast-moving subjects, such as sea waves and fireworks and then combining them. I can see how it's easy to merge static shots but not rapidly moving ones. Any help here?
My guess is either two exposures combined in photoshop (one for the sky, one for th fireworks) or they used a card to cover the fireworks as they continued to expose for the ground. This way the fireworks aren't overexposed as that part of the frame is black. I tried this for the first time while I was shooting fireworks and it came out okay

[Gerome]

Alright, how about this as a processor intensive project - HDR videos. Some scenics like these added to ski flicks could be some serious eye candy to rot the brain!!!!!

1171950

927266

1209223

[Tippster]

I think it would be neat if you could start the vids as normal and then slowly ramp up the HDR amount/level in time.

[Keegan]

Those HDR vids are unreal!
I usually process my HDRs from one RAW exposure and then use Photomatix Pro. I definitely try not to overdo mine as it just defeats the purpose.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3186/2655067105_40fc6fc049.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3021/2653222427_63d31b7c2d.jpg

[hdcb166]

This one turned out pretty HDR-looking but its just a single photo. Its not even edited but it still looks pretty surreal.

http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk243/hdcb166/HarrisonBrown2007-20082.jpg

[Roo]

That low light angle is key. Nice shot.

[Roo]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3054/2673410771_635f42b437_b.jpg

Quite obviously HDR but I like it.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3163/2688231001_bdabdeec8c_b.jpg

Once again but with the hDR volume turned down a few notches...

[grapedrink]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3054/2673410771_635f42b437_b.jpg

Quite obviously HDR but I like it.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3163/2688231001_bdabdeec8c_b.jpg

Once again but with the hDR volume turned down a few notches...

the second looks about a million times better than the first..

[Natedogg]

This may be a total jong question (and may have been discussed previously), but what is the difference between the dynamic range of the eye and the dynamic range of a normal DSLR exposure? I feel like some of these HDR images (especially sunset) are closer to reality than a typical exposure--ie., HDR is actually more normalized to the human eye.