I must be learning about photography I actually understood what you meant. Would it be like combining images in layers using gimp
Hi Warren,
Technically speaking, all the images you ever see printed or displayed only have a
Low Dynamic Range (LDR). This is a limitation of the state-of-the art of current
output display devices.
Currently, as technology stands today, one can synthesize an HDR "image" file
using software to combine multiple bracketed shots. Internally, the file format
is representing each pixel, not as an integer representation, but as a floating
point number.
Unfortunately there is currently no display technology that can render the image
with that full dynamic range.
As a kludge, a process called "tone mapping" can be employed to filter out a
subset of the HDR file to create a conventional low resolution image that
can be shown on a display or printed on paper.
The tone mapping process can be set-up to produce images that depart
from how we normally see the world through our own eyes. This provides
for some artistic freedom, either for better or for worse depending upon taste.
The tone mapped output files are what are commonly referred to as "HDR images"
though this is strictly speaking a misnomer and technically incorrect. The tone
mapped image is an LDR image.
Alternatively, one can use some other technique, such as selective masks
to create a composite output image from a selection of bracketed exposures.
In the future, perhaps cameras and output display devices will be able
to directly capture an HDR image in a single exposure and then render
it in its full HDR glory.
Interesting stuff, thank you Gary and all (mostly ).
Had a bit of a play this arv, but didnt come up with anything dramatic. May take a bit to find out how to achieve those dramatic results.
Took me 2 hours today to find out how to get 100 ISO on my 450D, and fianlly worked out how to turn off ' highlight tone priority', then you can get 100 ISO. It seems its better to shoot at ISO 100 for HDR.
G'day Liz, can I offer some advice? If you are going to attempt HDR, you really need to shoot full manual, on a tripod using "best practice" such as shutter release, mirror lockup etc. Keep ISO and aperture constant, and change the exposures with shutter speed.
There are some really horrible HDR images around, as per the "I hate your HDR" link in H's sig there. Many are blurry/soft because hand-held. The software is not "magical" and perfectly align the different exposures, and it's impossible with moving subjects such as people, clouds, trees/leaves swaying in the breeze.
The other big mistake people make is to think that a crap photo to start with will magically become awesome if it's run through HDR software. Fact is, if it looks unappealing by itself, HDR won't help. It's not special effect software, although it is often abused in this way.
And finally, please don't attempt to make HDR from a single exposure. That is not HDR by definition, and the dark areas become noisy and horrible.
There are masses of us H.
I do admire your "resistance" though
Your critique has taught me a lot of respect, for HDR. And not every HDR works, as I have learnt.
So I use it wisely (I still take the HDR that when I get around to processing it, but not publish it, unless it's right.)
I have the newish Canon L lens (70-200 2.8 II IS) coming, hopefully I'll get it Monday, so things are going to get interesting.
Photomatix for me. I do use PS CS5 on the odd chance.
I like using HDR. Its an interesting and artistic way of playing around with your data. Used well, it works well.
I'm still very new to it , but playing around with the settings entertains me to no end
I really like the idea of HDR timelapse. This link for me showed what potential HDR has when shooting scenes with a lot of contrast ( ie the bright doorway and low light interior.)
Its a long winded video ( but educational) and found that it is true that when looking with your eyes you can see the details in the dark areas as well as the bright areas. When the camera take a shot, you might not get the view your eyes see...... but with the HDR it "resembles" what you see with your eyes (thats my opinion), and that's what I like about HDR........Maybe I should start a web site " ilikeyourhdr"?
The video is a step up from single shot HDR...and some, but ...well look for your self.
I use Photomatix, and it works for me.
Here are some pix I took just trying some bracketing and using Photomatix. They are really not the best, but I am just trying and having fun. I personally like some of them, but would not put them in a contest.
HDR an Non Hdr shots....sorry they are a bit mixed up...
Bartman
Must admit tis not the best pic....I was only trying to give examples of before and after..ie the blown out highlights and .......well yep it is bad.
I'll have a go at processing them in pse8 ( RAW). I'll post my results sometime after the Rapture, cause that will keep me occupied for some time..... you know ....bracketing several shots of the Rapture breaking through the clouds here in Perth\
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane
The last image there is the reason why HDR is made of fail.
If your eyes see halos and saturation artifacts, it's time to see a doctor, ASAP.
Shooting RAW, if you manually blended them in your post-processing software of choice, I guarantee you, they'd look better.
If you look through the terrestrial photography forum and do a search on HDR and my username, you will see that I used to post lots and lots of HDR imagery.
I then realised the mistake I was making and climbed out of the novelty hole. I haven't looked back since.
It's the single greatest way to destroy hard earned, and hard thought out data capture.
Sooner or later, people realise that it doesn't do their photography any justice and move on.
Congratulations on the new lens. I have the first iteration of it. If that's anything to go by, and, the samples I've seen on the web of the Mark II, you are going to love it. It's sharper at f/2.8 than its older brother. And, that's saying something.
H
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanrz
There are masses of us H.
I do admire your "resistance" though
Your critique has taught me a lot of respect, for HDR. And not every HDR works, as I have learnt.
So I use it wisely (I still take the HDR that when I get around to processing it, but not publish it, unless it's right.)
I have the newish Canon L lens (70-200 2.8 II IS) coming, hopefully I'll get it Monday, so things are going to get interesting.
Photomatix for me. I do use PS CS5 on the odd chance.
A girl from work last night downloded a HDR App onto her Iphone, and had fun paying around with that!!
You take an image then have to touch the screen in a dark area, it takes a pic, then a light area, and it takes a pic, then combines. It looked interesting to have a play around with.
There was an iPhone App, and an Android App for about $1.99 each.
If you look through the terrestrial photography forum and do a search on HDR and my username, you will see that I used to post lots and lots of HDR imagery.
H
From someone who loooves taking images, it will be great to travel down this path, as you did H. Down the track I may also become enlightened, and terminate the practice, but in the meantime I am going to enjoy it.
From someone who loooves taking images, it will be great to travel down this path, as you did H. Down the track I may also become enlightened, and terminate the practice, but in the meantime I am going to enjoy it.
DITTO Liz.......
I am enjoying the HDR path ATM and I'm sure when I master Photoshop( before the end of days) i''ll convert ......maybe.......
Bartman
The call has gone out to the RSPCA, the judge has issued a court order and they will
be knocking on H's door some time in the early hours of the morning.
. Would it be like combining images in layers using gimp
