Handheld burst HDR

[Anson]

not true.

try doing it with a sunset.

Haha... for HDR Processing, the two main approach is to "enhance detail" or "compress tonal", the former would be easier to be simulated thru a single JPEG file.

For sunset/sunrise I would need a under exposure (-2/3) JPEG file to imitate a "compress tonal" like HDR effect.

Ultimately, I think it's the amount of time (hours) & layers (in PS) you would spend on your PP for a single shot or just bring a tripod to take HDR. :bsmilie:

 

[jopel]

Haha... for HDR Processing, the two main approach is to "enhance detail" or "compress tonal", the former would be easier to be simulated thru a single JPEG file.

For sunset/sunrise I would need a under exposure (-2/3) JPEG file to imitate a "compress tonal" like HDR effect.

simulated thru a single RAW file - will give you a slightly better image than jpeg but no where near multiple exposures approach.


For sunset/sunrise I would need a under exposure (-2/3) JPEG file to imitate a "compress tonal" like HDR effect. :think:

unlikely you can get good result. If die die can only take one and die die must be jpeg, then do it with a nd filter. we can do a field test and see the result.

 

[visage356]

Yes I don't think jpeg or RAW gives +/- 1 to 2 stops exposure to work with at all... if your camera's sensor can do that, tell me how & hook me up - willing to pay big $$$. In the meantime I'll use HDR.

 

[Rashkae]

Yes I don't think jpeg or RAW gives +/- 1 to 2 stops exposure to work with at all... if your camera's sensor can do that, tell me how & hook me up - willing to pay big $$$. In the meantime I'll use HDR.

Huh? You really need to read up a bit more. 14-bit RAW files can give up to 4 stops of leeway on underexposed details.

Most DSLR cameras have 1-2 stops leeway in RAW, and some are even better.

"In our tests with real world shots the A900 consistently allowed us to pull back up to 2 to 2.5 stops of highlight information from overexposed (and apparently clipped) scenes"

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra900/page24.asp

 

[wildsoyabean]

agree with night86mare.
Also shots with the sun in frame & lots of details on the ground to capture.
I like the natural look (dynamic range of human eye) so I don't use HDR on anything else.

the dynamic range of the eye is acutally much more than the camera.
it also have instant focus up to about 10mm.
a majority of us have back focusing problem though and hence needs corrections( glasses):bsmilie:

 

[Anson]

unlikely you can get good result. If die die can only take one and die die must be jpeg, then do it with a nd filter. we can do a field test and see the result.

Like I say using a single JPG to simulate HDR would not be as good or easy as using multiple exposure shots, however it's possible.

"Ultimately, I think it's the amount of time (hours) & layers (in PS) you would spend on your PP for a single shot or just bring a tripod to take HDR."

 

[night86mare]

Like I say using a single JPG to simulate HDR would not be as good or easy as using multiple exposure shots, however it's possible.

maybe your understanding of hdr is different.

my understanding is that dynamic range is expanded.

a jpg file does not contain much more information in terms of details than it has.

so tell me, how do you increase shadow or highlight detail, prevent blown highlights and blocked shadows?

if you mean, HDR EFFECT, whatever that is.. that is simple, just whack ANY photo with shadow/highlight tool in photoshop, it will look like it has halos, it will look like the light has gone wrong.. but that's not what i'm talking about.

 

[Anson]

maybe your understanding of hdr is different.

my understanding is that dynamic range is expanded.

a jpg file does not contain much more information in terms of details than it has.

so tell me, how do you increase shadow or highlight detail, prevent blown highlights and blocked shadows?

if you mean, HDR EFFECT, whatever that is.. that is simple, just whack ANY photo with shadow/highlight tool in photoshop, it will look like it has halos, it will look like the light has gone wrong.. but that's not what i'm talking about.

My idea of a HDR shot is to enhance the details & have have a richer tonal effect. Like I mention before, if you are working with a single JPEG it's the amount of hours & layers you would like to PS the shots to simulate an HDR effect photo. Of course if it's as simple as turning up the shadow/highlight tools, I guess it would not be special.

 

[night86mare]

My idea of a HDR shot is to enhance the details & have have a richer tonal effect. Like I mention before, if you are working with a single JPEG it's the amount of hours & layers you would like to PS the shots to simulate an HDR effect photo. Of course if it's as simple as turning up the shadow/highlight tools, I guess it would not be special.

so pray, show us results then

i mean, if it is all talk and no action, you will not convince anyone.

for one, i am not convinced at all.

 

[9V-Orion Images]

A couple of shots with a silhouetted subject salvaged through Photomatix Pro.

 

[Anson]

so pray, show us results then

i mean, if it is all talk and no action, you will not convince anyone.

for one, i am not convinced at all.

Why not you PM me 1 JPEG (with correct-exposure) picture, and let me give it a go... :bsmilie:

 

[night86mare]

Why not you PM me 1 JPEG (with correct-exposure) picture, and let me give it a go... :bsmilie:

ok

let's see what your misinterpretation of hdr will be then, you can use this picture

if your end result is something like this, please do not bother posting it up, i will tell you you have wasted your time

 

[Anson]

Not a very good picture for HDR, nevertheless I would give it a try.

To work with one single JPG shot for HDR, the JPG must be in high-res with min compression, for this shot if I crank up my "HDR effect" the sky would be pixeled. The picture is also inclined toward the blue tone, it would be better if a more colorful sample (like in 9V-Orion Images) is used.

 

[Guiii]

some software does the alignment before stacking, such as the mentioned photomatix pro. I'm using Corel paintshop pro which does the same thing also, shooting HDR using 3 frames is not a problem.

 

[spheredome]

Can I ask how to make the cloud remain white when running thru HDR? I tried Photomatix and everytime the clouds always turns grey like this one I took on Sat. I like white clouds. Pls advise. Thanks

 

[Anson]

Can I ask how to make the cloud remain white when running thru HDR? I tried Photomatix and everytime the clouds always turns grey like this one I took on Sat. I like white clouds. Pls advise. Thanks

Use PS with the HDR image (from Photomatix) as the background, overlay with a correct exposure on that, mask out the white clouds and adjust your curves (adjustment) and sample the white, grey & dark points.

Hope it helps.

 

[night86mare]

Not a very good picture for HDR, nevertheless I would give it a try.

To work with one single JPG shot for HDR, the JPG must be in high-res with min compression, for this shot if I crank up my "HDR effect" the sky would be pixeled. The picture is also inclined toward the blue tone, it would be better if a more colorful sample (like in 9V-Orion Images) is used.

ok, if you notice, my original image had color in the sky throughout the frame.

in yours, the color has become blown out. in both before and after shots.. there is detail on the building.

you have added no detail whatsoever. in fact, you have lost it. instead of widening the dynamic range in any way, you have clipped it happily. in short, this is not HDR. if i may term it, i would call it LDR (low dynamic range imaging)!

this can easily be done by whacking shadow lifting tool in photoshop, and then apply curves. no need any form of layering.

 

[Anson]

ok, if you notice, my original image had color in the sky throughout the frame.

in yours, the color has become blown out. in both before and after shots.. there is detail on the building.

you have added no detail whatsoever. in fact, you have lost it. instead of widening the dynamic range in any way, you have clipped it happily. in short, this is not HDR. if i may term it, i would call it LDR (low dynamic range imaging)!

this can easily be done by whacking shadow lifting tool in photoshop, and then apply curves. no need any form of layering.

For the shots, I actually mask-out the sky. Due to the fact that image resolution & PQ, if I were to put up my effect the whole picture would be pixeled & JPEG artifact would be shown.

See the details in the main building, it's already showing signs of JPEG artifact even on my min setting. If I were to pump up my PP on this low-res image, I am sure the result would terrible.

 

[night86mare]

For the shots, I actually mask-out the sky. Due to the fact that image resolution & PQ, if I were to put up my effect the whole picture would be pixeled & JPEG artifact would be shown.

See the details in the main building, it's already showing signs of JPEG artifact even on my min setting. If I were to pump up my PP on this low-res image, I am sure the result would terrible.

whatever the case, you ask for "right exposure" shots

if i give you a gnd shot, no big deal if it's just lightening up the shadows and masking out things.. all the details are there. so you have not gained anything else beyond what is in the shot..

true hdr involves combining different shots with a sky still there, and the building with full enough detail. if it is done properly. why didn't i give you a sunset shot? because if you can resurrect blown detail, you would be winning the nobel prize for photography - they would start one just for you.

anyways, i have already proven my point, that hdr with single photo is not possible. if you wish to go ahead and say that "oh, i can do it".. then you're welcome to live in your own bubble. i just didn't want anyone reading this thread to come under false impressions that you can actually expand dynamic range within a SINGLE JPG FILE, because that is not possible, period. last post here.

 

[Anson]

anyways, i have already proven my point, that hdr with single photo is not possible. if you wish to go ahead and say that "oh, i can do it".. then you're welcome to live in your own bubble. i just didn't want anyone reading this thread to come under false impressions that you can actually expand dynamic range within a SINGLE JPG FILE, because that is not possible, period. last post here.

You may disagree, but I think my PP already brought out some additional details in the building area. For any PP to be successful, your source image matter the most. To choose a source that is already heavily compressed... hmm.. I really wonder why? :think:

Whether it's a bubble or a fact, it's up to the viewer's dissertation. Like I mention before, it's a simulate HDR shot and not a true HDR (which uses several shots taken in difference exposure).

Would be interesting if you had that particular shot in HDR and send me the full-res version of the correct exposure copy. And we could see if I could simulate similar effect from the copy. :bsmilie: