HDR

[Prince Photogenic]

Hello CSers, can someone enlighten me what is a HDR? Is it a function of a camera?

I tried reading it up on wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging) but i still don't get it..

Don't tell me i'm stupid or dumb ah.. =) TIA

 

[Draken413o]

HDR is high dynamic range. Or easier to understand it's what our eye truly see. As our camera can only capture a finite amount of dynamic range, it is not able to capture a sunrise or sunset with either the foreground or background exposed nicely.. (try taking a sunset, the sunset may look nice but everything else would be shadows, or if you get everything nice, the sunset will be overblown.)

So to curb this problem, photographers use a tool called hdr to bring both foreground and background into perfect balance. We need to take multiple expousres of various exposures with a fixed, focal length, and aperture setting and blend them all with programs.

You can use tools such as photomatix, nik software hdr efex pro or photoshop cs5 hdr pro. I've tried all and I like nik software just because its simple to use. cs5 does have quite natural hdr.

This is just the tip of the ice berg and it will hook you after you get a few nice hdrs.

ENJOI!

 

[lawrencewkl]

Hi Prince,

Yes, you can do HDR using software after you have taken the photos. However, some cameras (both PnS and DSLR) have a HDR function that do it for you in camera (some need tripod, some dun need). The 1st option seems to be the best if you want to do HDR in depth, the 2nd option (for the moment) is good if you just want better dynamic range and won't want to invest $ and time for a basic HDR photo. Anyway, just my 2 cents worth, enjoy!

 

[leews2001]

There are two meanings. Originally, HDR meant High Dynamic Range. It originates from imaging where techniques are developed to overcome limitation of sensors. In recent years, the original meaning of HDR is lost. Now it is have evolved to become a new form of kitsch art --- Hideous, Dreadful and Radioactive.

 

[giantcanopy]

It can be a double edge sword like what leews2001 mentioned.
Oftentimes the scenes with an extremely wide dynamic range that "requires" HDR are the ones that do worst in realistic processing.

Ryan

 

[Prince Photogenic]

oh.. i havent learnt post processing yet.. i only used picasa to straighten some photos and the auto contrast..

 

[Octarine]

There are two meanings. Originally, HDR meant High Dynamic Range. It originates from imaging where techniques are developed to overcome limitation of sensors. In recent years, the original meaning of HDR is lost. Now it is have evolved to become a new form of kitsch art --- Hideous, Dreadful and Radioactive.

Let's not condemn it. The same goes for any form of post-processing and the age old question of how much post processing is necessary / allowed / good whatever. It can enhance things, it can be done wrongly. But a blunt rejection doesn't help. Some people like the kitsch art look, others prefer a rendering close to what the human eye sees. And thirdly, there is always the intended purpose as context. Landscapes used for fantasy stories do not need to reflect our reality and still they can look great. ... the eye of the beholder.

 

[Rashkae]

oh.. i havent learnt post processing yet.. i only used picasa to straighten some photos and the auto contrast..

You bought a Sony cam, right? so you have HDR built-in and can compare the effects of using it vs. not using it.

 

[hitendra]

i love hdr and i try to use the hdr function of my camera very often... still trying to understand it fully though... but when i see the stuff others have done, it really impresses me...

below is one i took recently - (pardon the "ghost" - too many people at angkor )

 

[giantcanopy]

i love hdr and i try to use the hdr function of my camera very often... still trying to understand it fully though... but when i see the stuff others have done, it really impresses me...

below is one i took recently - (pardon the "ghost" - too many people at angkor )

The shot itself looks pretty underexposed with a strong blue case, unless it is as intended.

A search on flickr for HDR will show many examples of HDRs done either positively or radioactively. With abit of inspection, you will be able to tell how a non HDR or a HDR shot is taken.

Ryan

 

[hitendra]

@ryan - yea.. i thought so too... but my wife liked this exposure level, so i kept it but the blue is a bit natural, since it was extremely cloudy and overcast.. maybe i should've fiddled a bit more with the wb

anyway, i am still learning hdr myself... hope things will improve as i practice more...

thanks for your comments appreciate it

 

[9V-Orion Images]

Just an example.
Images taken in a situation that will otherwise be almost impossible to closely replicate with a camera what the human eyes actually saw.

"Standard" Exposure

HDR rendering with Photomatix Pro

"Standard" Exposure

HDR rendering with Photomatix Pro​

 

[Prince Photogenic]

@Rashkae - Thanks for the advice. yes, i just got my camera and i'm still exploring it. =)

 

[Draken413o]

Just an example.
Images taken in a situation that will otherwise be almost impossible to closely replicate with a camera what the human eyes actually saw.

"Standard" Exposure

HDR rendering with Photomatix Pro

"Standard" Exposure

HDR rendering with Photomatix Pro​

wow thats an example of radioactive hdr.

 

[9V-Orion Images]

wow thats an example of radioactive hdr.

Opps, seems I'm stuck in the dreaded HDR hole. Do pardon me. :sweat: :bsmilie:

 

[Draken413o]

i'm stuck in the eternal damnit i suck hole..