Firstly, sorry I've been away from the forum and haven't had a chance to reply.... so, where do I start?
Firstly I'd just like to say congratulations to Andrew (Hector) for his wonderful images and photographic skills.
Andrew Murrell, Gary Kopff and a few others here are photographers which I look up to because of their imaging skills and talent for composition, content selection and processing skills.
I don't like being drawn into a Canon Vs Nikon debate because as any good photographer will tell you it's not the camera body that determines the final outcome of the image but rather the photographer who takes the shot.
Many times I've seen people view a beautiful image and their first response is:
" wow, your camera takes wonderful photos ! "
I've know some photographers who have responded with the following tongue in cheek response:
"Thank you, your mouth forms wonderful compliments !"...
I don't want people to get the wrong idea about any camera brand.
It's up to the individual to do their research and choose a system of camera equipment that suites their needs and skills.
The final result of any image taken with any particular brand will depend mostly on the skills of the photographer, not the brand itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hector
Andrew you have outdone yourself. Fallen log is a great image. I like the way that Photoshop handles HDR, not to harsh and little to no artifacts.
Great depth of field in that image as well, shot at about f16??
Andrew
|
Thank you Andrew, yes I too prefer Photoshop over the others in it's ability to handle HDR processing. (Read below for more on Photoshop HDR).
The "Fallen Log" was indeed shot at f/16, excellent observation Andrew !
Quote:
Originally Posted by acropolite
Interesting to compare the HDR image of the falls (RB) with Hectors (Andrew) image of the same composition.
On my monitor the HDR image looks rather flat and unnatural. The colours of the rocks on the middle RHS of the image look washed out and quite unnatural, whereas the colours from the D300 seem more natural and vibrant.
Not having been there, it's difficult to say which image more accurately matches the reality, but, despite being a Canon man, I must say that in this instance I much prefer the image from the Nikon. 
Now I think I'll go and wash my mouth out with soap...  |
LOL Phil, it's is not necessary to "wash one's mouth out" for saying you prefer one image over another, especially when based on an image viewed in jpg on the net.
(I know you said it tongue in cheek).
I have seen many many Nikon images on the net which are simply stunning and probably as just many Canon images too.
Surly it boils down to the photographers processing regime and how the RAW file is handled in Post Processing.
In fact I agree with you, that in this shot that you refer to, I too am not totally happy with it.
It's actually the first time I have posted an image using Photomatix to process a HDR image and I am less than happy with it, preferring to use Photoshop Merge to HDR instead.
I was actually telling Andrew (Hector) in a PM that I prefer PS HDR over the Photomatix app.
I find Photoshop HDR gives me better results than the other HDR apps.
And as you have witnessed here, the result from my use of Photomatix in HDR is not up to the quality I can achieve when I use PS, but that's just me.
I may redo this one using Photoshop, I'll see.
As I've stated, I do prefer to keep my HDR's looking as natural as possible while still trying to display as wide a dynamic range as possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hector
Thank you Phil.
That must be hard for any Canon fan to say. Maybe Andrew may like to try and process the correctly exposed image from his HDR collection in photoshop without HDR to get a proper comparison of the Cameras. The different processing the images have had will effect the way they look. I personally dont like the look of the HDR images but I find that Andrew does not over do the processing.
|
Thank you Andrew, I think we both have very similar imaging routines and our processing preferences are very similar too.
I'll see about processing the single shot and post it later for comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary
Firstly, thanks to the guys for the lovely images!
I just wanted to take a few moments to help clarify some technical points.
It is important to keep in mind that none of the excellent images on this thread
are HDR images. All of them are LDR images.
This is a very important distinction and a key to what is really going on.....
.
.
The tone mapping operations and the decisions the
photographer makes about how the tone mapping algorithms will be
applied will likely account for more of the differences in color than those that can
be attributed to come from the cameras themselves. So no need to trade
in your camera for some other brand. 
.
.
Hopefully the above might be a helpful insight for those unfamiliar with the
underlying technologies involved.
Thanks again to our intrepid photographers for their splendid posts!:
Best regards
Gary |
Once again, Gary has put into eloquent words what I find very hard to convey in the written form.
He has precisely explained what real HDR is.
We all refer to HDR images but as explained it's actually a misnomer.
It's simply the best we can do with the technology we have.
It's also interesting to realise that when working with Photoshop HDR merge and RAW files, you actually end up with a 32 bit image that then has to to tone mapped down to 16 bit so that you can work on it and from there to be further squeezed down to the forum size of <200kb.
This in fact makes it very difficult to produce a "HDR" image that retains maximum Dynamic Range whilst still presenting a "natural" view of the scene without overdoing the colour saturation.
I do like some HDR images that look over saturated, but these are few and not all scenes lend themselves to this type of process.
As for Andrew's shots here, I congratulate him as I thoroughly enjoy them and is what I like to see in any photograph, whether it's done in HDR or not.
Cheers and thanks everyone for your input, I look forward to more here and to see Mike's lovely images too.
