Photoshop HDR Pro vs. HDR Efex vs Photomatix

Dave_W

The Dude
I've spent most of the day playing around with Photomatix and it's forced me to revisit both Photoshop and HDR Efex. So I took a random set of 5 bracketed images and loaded them into each program. I tried to optimize each image as best I could within the corresponding program.

Here is my results, clearly the PS HDR Pro is inferior in nearly every way but the Photomatix and Efex are close but I think I like the Photomatix a little better....I think.

Photoshop HDR Pro

_D8A7927 HD-PS.jpg



Photomatix Pro

_D8A7932_3_4_5_6-2.jpg




HDR Efex Pro

_D8A7932_HDR.jpg
 

Moab Man

Senior Member
I'm all over that Photomatix Pro. I like the stronger colors, visually clear, and seems magical.

The last one still seems to have that haze in the air.
 

Dave_W

The Dude
Thanks for the feedback. I'm having a lot of fun playing around with these HDR programs. To be honest, before last night I was never a big fan of HDR. Part of the reason was the way PS made them look and the other reason was the over-baked and dreamy look. I guess I should have spent more time playing with the Efex program But putzing around with Photomatix has changed my whole perspective on HDR.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
Thanks for posting these examples Dave. Personally, I prefer the results you got with Photomatix. But there is quite a learning curve with it. There are a lot of adjustments you can work with to get the desired result and you can make it look quite bad as well as good. This is what I like about it is the possibility to have a peak at a lot of choices at once in the tonemapping section. But it's no way perfect and there will never be a perfect picture either. But all the fun is in the searching for photographic excellence.

Enjoy your Nikon!
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
You can immediately see the advantages of the HDR-specific software over Photoshop alone, so this is a great comparison. I like each of the last two for their own reasons, but have to ask how much of the Control Point feature you used in HDR Efex Pro because I suspect you could have matched the detail and saturation of the sunset in the latter. Though I haven't messed with Photomatix, the Control Point technology is what I find to be the biggest differentiator with the Nik software. To be able to control most of the same settings you have for the entire image in a localized, content aware section is extremely powerful.

To Moab Man's point, with it you could have optimized the image globally for either the sky or foreground and then used control points to adjust any over/under effect on the other half of the image. My take is were you to take the latter and bump the contrast and saturation a bit you would be fairly close, and then with a single control point, or perhaps a series of them (do one and clone it where necessary) you could have the depth of color found in the Photomatix image and reduce some of the darkness in the shadowy areas in the center, particularly around the pool just below the sun.

Obviously they both do a great job, and I need to try Photomatix one of these days to see what the fuss is all about because it has many fans. But I love the tweakability that the Control Points give you in all of Nik's software (if you've used Capture NX2 then you know) and it would be hard for me to part with it now that I've used it. I just wish that they'd give you a trial version that did not watermark everything for at least a short period of time (Nik gives 15 days). Sort of a drag.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
I've been a fan of photomatix and actually pefer the light program (now called essentials) over the "pro" version. The pro version looks more involved and "exciting" but just seems to have more pre-set combos and gives the same results. The best $39 I've ever spent on software!
 

DTigga

New member
I agree that photmatix does a good job with ghost removal, however I still think Nik has it covered mainly due to its control points. I have on occasion used the in-built photoshop hdr to do the initial merging with ghost removal, when saved it as a 32bit file. I then perform a tone-map with the nik software to great affect.

Note that this was when i was using v1 of Nik hdr and I have found v2 to be much better at ghost removal and merging.
 

WhiteLight

Senior Member
I had my eyes jump off my sockets when i first saw some results with Photomatix.
Like a lot of people, i just totally loved the program for quite a while.

But i recently tried Efex & i think i like it better.
Mainly because i feel that images look more pleasing right off the box without much tweaking.

Secondly, the control points are just awesome.

Thirdly, the amount of noise Photomatix throws in is just so frustrating.
Even with Luminance at a bare minimum.

I could be doing something wrong too, but i think i am now leaning towards Nik Efex 2.
 
Top