HDR ABC or 123

[Peter Petrelli]

I know that photography carries a personal "to each his own" touch, but since HDR is new (or I am new to it), anyone can share their ABCs or 123s?

:sweat:

 

[navlem]

wat you mean by ABCs and 123s?

 

[VirusAceDJ]

does ts mean like our style or settings when dealing with HDR?

 

[Ryvaleus]

I think he means the basics.. :dunno:

 

[Peter Petrelli]

I think he means the basics.. :dunno:

Yes, basics... thanks.

 

[TigerOyster]

Yes, basics... thanks.

if basics then i can comment abit...use AEB then use photomatix and play around with it to achieve the effect you want

 

[night86mare]

I know that photography carries a personal "to each his own" touch, but since HDR is new (or I am new to it), anyone can share their ABCs or 123s?

:sweat:

i use photomatix when i'm lazy.

tone mapping settings very straightforward, strength anywhere from 20-60, no more than that, else the scene starts looking very artificial and light tends to fly around the place.

saturation anywhere from 40-60, depending.

luminosity will always be tuned to -1 eventually, and for white point and black point, judge by eye.

after that, tweak in photoshop - standard workflow for all photographs:
1) distortion correction if any, liquify if any --> crop
2) shadow/highlight adjustment
3) curves adjustment
4) color balance adjustment
5) layers (to darken sky further if needed using multiply, and adjust opacity; also to apply more gradient if needed, using gradient tool + overlay and adjust opacity)
6) exposure adjustment (usually + exposure, lower gamma)
7) unsharp mask

if i am not feeling so lazy, i rather do manual blending, i.e. stack the photos myself, and erase to reveal relevant layers in photoshop. this takes significantly much more time than photomatix + massaging though.

 

[Peter Petrelli]

is photomatix a software I can download?

 

[nickmak]

Hi,

OT first: Where's Nathan, Peter? haha...

Anyway, remember to keep the picture looking natural. It has to bring out all the tones and colours of your picture but not so much that it looks too unreal.

Cheers,
Nick

 

[navlem]

Hi,

OT first: Where's Nathan, Peter? haha...

Anyway, remember to keep the picture looking natural. It has to bring out all the tones and colours of your picture but not so much that it looks too unreal.

Cheers,
Nick

OT reply: Peter's on the rooftop thinking he could fly

Usually HDRs are good for bringing out details of landscape shots, especially when sky and subject is involved, and the subject usually becomes underexposed because of the sky.

 

[Ryvaleus]

I think natural or not, that's up to the taste of the photographer himself/herself. I prefer natural too but sometimes find myself inadvertently going a bit surreal when I do HDR before I even realize it.

 

[giantcanopy]

Something close to the eyes.

Flatness / wierd tones is not to ur taste, it can be minimized with some little experimentation with tone mapping.

is photomatix a software I can download?

Yes, the free trial download has a watermark across the picture. The paid registered copy doesn't.

Ryan

 

[Peter Petrelli]

does photomatix and adobe bridge differ in result?

 

[night86mare]

does photomatix and adobe bridge differ in result?

i don't know that adobe bridge can be used to tone map or generate hdr.

i think you are talking about photoshop.

in which case, the answer is YES. photomatix is infinitely more user friendly.

that said, both generate very unnatural results.

 

[Peter Petrelli]

i don't know that adobe bridge can be used to tone map or generate hdr.

i think you are talking about photoshop.

in which case, the answer is YES. photomatix is infinitely more user friendly.

that said, both generate very unnatural results.

yes im using adobe bridge to open my photos and select them for HDR merging but after I do, the HDR image will appear in a Photoshop window. from there I try to play with the image.

will try photomatix, being user friendly as most say.