First HDR -- I think?

K

KWJams

Senior Member
Got into my settings and selected bracketing and got 3 exposures of this tree. Turns out my Corel Paint Shop Photo Pro X3 has a HDR option so I loaded them up and merged them together and this is the results.

I am guessing that for a good HDR picture you need a lot of contrast which this picture lacks.

Exif info is f/5.6, 1/160 on the first one. f/5.6, 1/400 on second and third was 1/250

Wasn't expecting anything great but was hoping to get 3 images at differnt exposures to merge together.

Is this a HDR image or am I on the wrong track?

1stHDR (Small).jpg
 
A

AxeMan - Rick S.

Senior Member
Ken what camera are you using? I auto bracket at -2, 0 ,+2 on my D90. Your on the right track, but I don't see any HDR here. I think it's your software. Download Photomatix at
HDR photography software & plugin for Lightroom, Aperture & Photoshop - Tone Mapping, Exposure Fusion & High Dynamic Range Imaging for photography,
it has a 30 day trial on it. Take the three same photos and run it in that. I think you will see a big change. Don't be afraid to play with those sliders, just don't "overcook it"
 
ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
Good advice from Rick, Ken. Even at your settings, you should have more of an hdr effect. Either your software doesn't have adequate settings or you didn't setit up right. If you post your three shots, one of us, we can tell if you have enough steps in between the shots and maybe process it for you in Photomatix to shou you how it should look.
 
Browncoat

Browncoat

Senior Member
Yeah, I agree. Even if this was processed at a low strength setting, there should be much more depth here. This looks like a normal single exposure shot to me.
 
J

Joseph Bautsch

New member
My opinion, an this is my opinion, is different from the others. Yes you do have the HDR effect here and it's a lot closer to what I think an HDR should be. To me a good HDR is a normal photograph with a lot of detail in the shadows and highlights. In your photo you can see it in the details of the tree leaves, branches and in the grass. You can also see it in the hallo effect between the tree and the clear blue sky. This hallo often happens with skies like this when there is not enough contrast for the program to make a proper merger. Your photo is on the lighter side of HDR and not over cooked, over saturated, and contrasty like a great many of the HDR shots you see here. I use a one stop three shot bracket on my D90. With this setting I can get the merged photo I am looking for, a normal exposure with great detail. I do agree with AxeMan, get the Photomatix HDR program. I use it as a plugin with Aperture3 and it works great.
 
K

KWJams

Senior Member
I didn't push any sliders, or cook any beans. Just merged the 3 together and then aligned them.
If there was some dreary clouds or more contrasting objects other than sky, grass and leaves the results would probably be a lot different.

D5000, AE bracketing value = AEO-7

The first one looks like normal exposure and a lot like the first image posted.

June 2011_5934 (Small).JPG
2nd
June 2011_5933 (Small).JPG
3rd
June 2011_5935 (Small).JPG
 
Browncoat

Browncoat

Senior Member
1And2more.jpg


Pardon the crudeness here...there's a bit of a quality difference when working w/ JPG files. Even if you don't go for that "processed look", I think you're still lacking in the detail and color saturation departments.
 
A

AxeMan - Rick S.

Senior Member
1stHDR (Small).jpgJune 2011_5933 (Small) (1)And2more_tonemapped.jpg


Your three photos run through Photomaxtix no adjustments "Enhancer - Painterly" setting. I think when we see the words HDR of lot of us are looking for results like the one I got from Photomaxtix.

However, after looking at your three photos and reading Joseph's reply, I stand corrected, Yes this is an HDR effect, but like Anthony said, it may lack in detail and color saturation.

There is no "Standard HDR" you can compare any HDR attempt to, so there is no right or wrong photo. Your second photo seams to show a little more "HDR" effect than the first, but like the first when I see the words HDR I'm expecting those clouds to "pop" more with the effect.

Kudos to you for diving into the HDR world. This post and Joseph's reply and has got me rethinking my bracketing settings for HDR, I'm going to have to try -1, 0 +1. Just for the simple fact I like to touch some of my photos with HDR and not go with the full effect.

Thanks for posting this one, it's really got me thinking, and I really don't know how to reply to it. What you have done here is not in the "norm" as we know it.

That's my take on this, and I'll let the others follow with their input.
 
Browncoat

Browncoat

Senior Member
I will also add...

I love HDR because it adds a whole new dimension to digital photography and allows for more artistic freedom. I firmly believe that were Ansel Adams around today, he would be a fierce proponent of HDR as it emulates digitally what he tried to capture on film. That said, HDR is different things to different people. Mr. Bautsch is a photorealistic enthusiast, and uses HDR to enhance tones and detail without making the image look processed. On the other hand, I am more of a surrealist and like to see how far I can push the boundaries. Most people fall somewhere in between.

I've toyed with HDR for over a year, and have tried just about every program under the sun. Photomatix is bar none the best program available. There's a free trial and it's only about $100 to purchase.

Also, and this is just personal opinion, I think 5 bracketed shots is optimum. 3 just isn't enough and 7 or 9 is usually overkill. Don't even bother with so-called "single exposure HDR" because that kind of defeats the point entirely.
 
K

KWJams

Senior Member
Thanks for all the replies -- and yes it has me thinking a lot about the process.

I think it was an article in the current issue of Outdoor Photographer where an old film shooter writes about being bitten by the DSLR bug and he commented on how HDR has had contrary affects to one of his old film photos that he has been selling where folks mistake it for HDR regardless of the fact that it was taken years ago before HDR was ever imagined.
He said that if a photo has been post processed to the point where it becomes un-natural looking or alien then maybe the trend has gone too far.
But I think that maybe some primitive painter felt the same way when his fellow tribesmen started painting on animal skins. :)
Another observation I made is that when powder coating metal first came out and folks were powder coating everything before they learned that some things like sheet metal does not accept powder coating without orange peeling. Some things are made for HDR and some things like my first picture above is not. My opinion is that if something would look great in B&W with a lot of details and contrast, then HDR will work.

I took a bunch of shots today with the exposure stretched out a little more and need to get to work on them and see what happens.
 
K

KWJams

Senior Member
4thHDR (Small).jpg

Difficult to say whether or not it is processed as an HDR image or if it is a normal exposure..:confused:

These last two images were three exposures @ -1.4, 0.0, and +1.3
 
ohkphoto

ohkphoto

Snow White
Very difficult to get crisp and sharp HDR shots without a tripod. The slightest movement is going to show up as fuzzy or ghostly when you finish processing. Glad you've got it on your wishlist :)
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
4thHDR Marcel's version.jpg

I think that you forget to play around with the image once it has gone through HDR. Here is my version of your latest flower HDR shot. I thought it just needed more contrast, saturation, definition.
 
K

KWJams

Senior Member
I wasn't sure if any tweaking would nullify the HDR affect or not. So far all of these pictures are straight out the camera.

Question, do you use the raw files to merge or the jpegs?
 
Top