Labrador Sunset In HDR

[reaper3075]

Hi all.

my humble attempt in HDR, pic taken at Labrador Park at sunset, or rather I think the sun had already set, as I was abit late. Pic was taken at about 1920-1930hrs.. pretty dark.

took only 2 sets of exposures, +0.3 and +1, exposed for 30 secs at f11 for each. Afterwhich merged it into HDR. Taken using the Sony A100.

[boga07]

nice...

just a query, does ur pic gets grainy once merge to hdr? my first attempt did..

[adiknaim]

if u look carefully, i tink the clouds are quite grainy.... nt sure how to prevent this...

[night86mare]

pretty good!

needs to be less tight though

i suspect to get rid of the grain you would need a wider range of exposures

grain is unavoidalbe in hdr.. but to still see grain at this size means that too much lifting of shadows is done in the program, which well, leads to noise

[wildstallion]

Originally Posted by night86mare pretty good! needs to be less tight though i suspect to get rid of the grain you would need a wider range of exposures grain is unavoidalbe in hdr.. but to still see grain at this size means that too much lifting of shadows is done in the program, which well, leads to noise

Yup, or you can smoothen it out with a blur in photoshop, especially for the smooth sky where it isnt that sharp anyway.

[reaper3075]

Originally Posted by boga07 nice... just a query, does ur pic gets grainy once merge to hdr? my first attempt did..

thanks..

think night86mare explained it already.. maybe perhaps not enough exposures. will definitely try it out again..

thanks for lookin'!

[reaper3075]

Originally Posted by night86mare pretty good! needs to be less tight though i suspect to get rid of the grain you would need a wider range of exposures grain is unavoidalbe in hdr.. but to still see grain at this size means that too much lifting of shadows is done in the program, which well, leads to noise

thanks man.

will definitely try it out again, with a more wider range of exposures.

may i ask, usually how far away each exposures should be? say -1, 0 and +1? -2, 0 and +2?

or is there no hard and fast rule...

thanks for the comments.

[night86mare]

Originally Posted by reaper3075 thanks man. will definitely try it out again, with a more wider range of exposures. may i ask, usually how far away each exposures should be? say -1, 0 and +1? -2, 0 and +2? or is there no hard and fast rule... thanks for the comments.

no rule actually

but i do think whatever you do will determine the output. i usually do 1 stop in between.. since the scene will never be there again.. safer than sorry, from -3 to +3.. go home then slowly decide which ones to use, and try to put them in to see which one works the best

[lastboltnut]

There is no rule to the interval of the exposures....but after you shoot, review the shots to make sure that all the details in the highlight and shadow (you intended to see) are captured in either the brightest or the darkest shot. If more exposures are needed, then just do it.

The more exposures you shoot and combine, the more details you get in the final HDRi pic......it should be good to have more details (isn't that the objectives of HDRi?)...but I realised that if the amount of details is too much, as in you can't really get this much with naked eye, then the pic will some how look fake/surreal, like those night86mare mentioned....thats why he said that with lower strength setting in Photomatix, the pic looks more real. This is my own opinion. What you guys think?

Originally Posted by reaper3075 thanks man. will definitely try it out again, with a more wider range of exposures. may i ask, usually how far away each exposures should be? say -1, 0 and +1? -2, 0 and +2? or is there no hard and fast rule... thanks for the comments.

[DeWei]

I love this HDR pic very much, not overdone like many others do. Well done dude.

[vbs1979]

well taken pic. never mind the noise. some noise is nice.

[jenson]

just to ask, any different with using a single RAW and process it in different exposures then use that to create HDR? Or is it better to take different shots of the same scene?

[lastboltnut]

If your single RAW with 12bit sensor (typical sensor bit depth, some are better, like Fuji's super CCD is 24bit) can capture all the details in the highlight/shadow, then it is enough (which also means that the scene DR is not that high). When the scene DR is really high, then you may need multiple shots to capture all the details.

Originally Posted by jenson just to ask, any different with using a single RAW and process it in different exposures then use that to create HDR? Or is it better to take different shots of the same scene?

[reaper3075]

Originally Posted by night86mare no rule actually but i do think whatever you do will determine the output. i usually do 1 stop in between.. since the scene will never be there again.. safer than sorry, from -3 to +3.. go home then slowly decide which ones to use, and try to put them in to see which one works the best

thanks for the clarification. however like what u said, scene will never be there again, that goes the same for clouds, especially for windy days. would clouds in different positions in the multiply exposures cause any say.. defects in the resulting HDRI?

[reaper3075]

Originally Posted by lastboltnut There is no rule to the interval of the exposures....but after you shoot, review the shots to make sure that all the details in the highlight and shadow (you intended to see) are captured in either the brightest or the darkest shot. If more exposures are needed, then just do it. The more exposures you shoot and combine, the more details you get in the final HDRi pic......it should be good to have more details (isn't that the objectives of HDRi?)...but I realised that if the amount of details is too much, as in you can't really get this much with naked eye, then the pic will some how look fake/surreal, like those night86mare mentioned....thats why he said that with lower strength setting in Photomatix, the pic looks more real. This is my own opinion. What you guys think?

in my opinion, ultimately it all depends on what the photographer wants.. realistic images full of details, or surreal 'paintings'. im sure both will look good in their own way..

[aeqmal]

NICE.
There's a velvety fog effect. Doesn't look like Labrador Park at all! Good attempt

[reaper3075]

Originally Posted by DeWei I love this HDR pic very much, not overdone like many others do. Well done dude.

thanks man..

[reaper3075]

Originally Posted by vbs1979 well taken pic. never mind the noise. some noise is nice.

didnt really notice the noise till it was mentioned here.. hehe thanks!

[reaper3075]

Originally Posted by aeqmal NICE. There's a velvety fog effect. Doesn't look like Labrador Park at all! Good attempt

thats the waves crashing on the rocks... pretty cool huh? always loved the effects.

thanks for the comments.

[night86mare]

Originally Posted by reaper3075 thanks for the clarification. however like what u said, scene will never be there again, that goes the same for clouds, especially for windy days. would clouds in different positions in the multiply exposures cause any say.. defects in the resulting HDRI?

yes, you will get cloud trails, that is the problem with hdr sometimes

but if your exposure is extremely long you would get cloud trails already

the only problem is when it is short, and then the cloud moves a short distance, then it is too obvious. at sunset, usually you would not need to worry so much about this