Is this consider HDR? (my first hdr??? shot)


xxdoggyxx

New Member
Feb 19, 2010
238
0
0
24
Right behind you. :P
#1



What do you think of this? The more i look, the more i feel that it does not look like one...

This shot is taken at Malaysia. Around Kluang. About 6Pm while waiting for train back to malaysia.

Would like to ask for tips on processing HDR photo.
Personally i feel that there is too much red in this picture.

+ This HDR is done using photomatix pro 4.0 with some post-processing on the color(contrast)

C&C all are welcome. :D

Thanks :D
 

ahming111

New Member
Jan 28, 2010
734
0
0
33
#3
the foregrd seems oof, where's your focal point?

play ard with the sliders, colors are nice in your pic but kind of unrealistic
 

Oct 2, 2009
26
0
0
#4
The photo looks a bit noisy and a tad overdone. You might want to have the surreal look, but not overdone that it'll look too unrealistic.
 

ahming111

New Member
Jan 28, 2010
734
0
0
33
#6
the focal point seems to be all the way into the background???
it shld be but i'm asking just in case the oof was from the HDR, not really sure about this kind of thing :)
 

Mar 13, 2010
522
0
0
Singapore (Ulu Pandan)
#7
agree with the above comments that it is too overdone. especially with the foreground being brighter than the skies. your light source, the sky should be brighter than the foreground. the red channel's way over saturated.

Probably you could dial back the red channel and darken the foreground. I would mute the colours of the foreground after the 2 steps, but that's just me.
 

candycaine

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2009
569
0
16
#9
This doesn't work for me. The HDR is overdone- I think the luminance and saturation sliders are pushed wayy too high. The photo looks a bit soft.

HDR helps to increase the dynamic range of the scene in areas where your camera can't capture it in a single exposure. Exposure fusion on Photomatix does the same thing with a different algorithm and more realistic results. You might want to play around with that too, if you don't want your photos to look unrealistic and painterly. :)

That said, HDR, when done tastefully, can add to the photo. Here, it does not.
 

xxdoggyxx

New Member
Feb 19, 2010
238
0
0
24
Right behind you. :P
#10
All comment heard. :D

As some of cser stated, I oweself agree that the it's too saturated.

Thanks all. Will improve and show you guys more hdr shot.

+ Yea, the focal point is all the way back. Was on 20mm.
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,667
72
48
lil red dot
#11
I would encourage you to shoot and present work not done in HDR.

If you depend on HDR to make everything picture interesting, you will not move forward in terms of compositional skills.
 

ahming111

New Member
Jan 28, 2010
734
0
0
33
#12
All comment heard. :D

As some of cser stated, I oweself agree that the it's too saturated.

Thanks all. Will improve and show you guys more hdr shot.

+ Yea, the focal point is all the way back. Was on 20mm.
maybe you can read up on hyperfocal, will help it landscape shooting :)
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#13
maybe you can read up on hyperfocal, will help it landscape shooting :)
he has pushed the image too hard.

even if it was perfectly well-focused, with all the correct techniques, in photomatix or equivalent hdr programs, when the image is taken to this extent, it will soften visibly, even at this size.

yes, i agree, the image is overdone. i would also crop the sky quite a bit to avoid a split 50-50 frame.
 

xxdoggyxx

New Member
Feb 19, 2010
238
0
0
24
Right behind you. :P
#14
he has pushed the image too hard.

even if it was perfectly well-focused, with all the correct techniques, in photomatix or equivalent hdr programs, when the image is taken to this extent, it will soften visibly, even at this size.

yes, i agree, the image is overdone. i would also crop the sky quite a bit to avoid a split 50-50 frame.
Sorry, I'm not good in english, What do you meant by "pushed the image too hard" ???
And, in what way the image is soften visibly?

Thanks for your comment. :D
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#16
Sorry, I'm not good in english, What do you meant by "pushed the image too hard" ???
And, in what way the image is soften visibly?

Thanks for your comment. :D

if you can't tell that the image has been softened from the 0 ev file visibly, then i can't help you.

pushed too hard = overprocessed.
 

xxdoggyxx

New Member
Feb 19, 2010
238
0
0
24
Right behind you. :P
#17
if you can't tell that the image has been softened from the 0 ev file visibly, then i can't help you.

pushed too hard = overprocessed.
Oh... I still don't quite understand that the image has been soften.
But from what you said, is it because i merge the 0ev file into this hdr picture, and therefore, soften the picture? I will do some try and error later on and see what you meant.

Thanks :D
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#18
Oh... I still don't quite understand that the image has been soften.
But from what you said, is it because i merge the 0ev file into this hdr picture, and therefore, soften the picture? I will do some try and error later on and see what you meant.

Thanks :D
can you post a 100% crop of the 0 ev file, and the hdr file?

that would solve everything, i'd wager. even if you don't want to do a 100% crop, just a closer crop would reveal everything.

are you saying that the image definition looks every bit the same as you as a 0 ev file? then something is wrong here.
 

candycaine

Senior Member
Sep 12, 2009
569
0
16
#19
Oh... I still don't quite understand that the image has been soften.
But from what you said, is it because i merge the 0ev file into this hdr picture, and therefore, soften the picture? I will do some try and error later on and see what you meant.

Thanks :D
He means the picture is visibly less sharp than the 0EV file, which is the photo taken at the 0EV exposure, without HDR.

Which is true.
 

Top Bottom