DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Experimenting with Tone Mapping
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 101, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/20/2006 04:57:45 AM · #1
I have been using the free version of PhotomatixPro for a while to generate extended dynamic range images. It's been interesting, but it was limited. I just paid for the registered copy to open up true HDRI imaging, and this includes something called "tone mapping" which I find fascinating. Here's an example of an extremely manipulated HDRI image with aggressive tone mapping. Note that nearly all this manipulation was done in Photomatix to generate the composite; PS was just used to clean it up a little and adjust the colors to be (believe it or not) less aggressive.



I'm aware that this is a flawed image on many levels, but an interesting effect is happening here.

R,
09/20/2006 05:10:39 AM · #2
Eh - you paid for something to do that?
I could have messed that up like that in my first 2 weeks using PS - jk
Pretty weird - can't say as it works for me though.

Message edited by author 2006-09-20 05:16:32.
09/20/2006 06:10:43 AM · #3
I play with this from time to time, I usually find the effect a little strong though. I do find it absolutely essential to run noise removal before letting photomatix do it\'s work as it will magnify any tiny grain hugely.

A very similar effect can be achieved by using multiple passes of unsharp mask with large but varying radius settings (which I believe is legal under basic editing rules)

Sometimes tone-mappng just makes the image. When it works, it works incredibly well.

Message edited by author 2006-09-20 06:11:41.
09/20/2006 07:59:10 AM · #4
Hi Robert... I, too, purchased Photomatix Pro because I find that it's a lot easier to work with their HDR process than with PhotoShop CS2 (to be honest, I simply cannot figure out how to make a good image out of PSCS2's HDRs!!!).

Anyway, I had previously uploaded this image which is HEAVILY photoshoped by hand, but I was never really happy with it. I tried to take it in a certain direction (with the orange filter, et al) but the overall dynamic range was just never there:



This image, on the other hand, is almost straight out of Photomatix Pro. I loaded up 4 exposures from a single raw file. Told Photomatix Pro to generate and HDR image. Then within a couple of minutes of tweaking the settings in the Reveal HDR Image, I had this:



All that was left to do in photoshop was to sharpen the image.

I have since played with Photomatix Pro a couple more times and these are some of the results I've gotten (again, only very minor tweaks inside of PhotoShop, mostly in the area of reducing for web, sharpening and adding a border):




09/20/2006 08:08:31 AM · #5
David...



...WOW!
09/20/2006 08:37:50 AM · #6
Heehee. Coming back to the thread I see you are not only talking about the tone mapping but also the HDR images. I have only used the tone mapping plugin for PS and never the compositing functions of photomatix pro.

I also have had no success with CS2s built in HDR tools, instead using a luminance selection and masking to combine my bracketed exposures. I could write up a quick tutorial if people were interested, but it really is very easy. Most photoshoppers can work it out for themselves fairly quickly if not using the technique already =).
09/20/2006 08:51:08 AM · #7
I see where they have a bundled version that includes the Tone Mapping Plug-In. What's the advantage of that? It seems that Tone Mapping is included with the Photomatrix Pro version also? What's the difference? Which version/package(s) did you guys buy?

Purchase Dynamic Range Increase software Photomatix
09/20/2006 09:42:33 AM · #8
Originally posted by BradP:

Eh - you paid for something to do that?
I could have messed that up like that in my first 2 weeks using PS - jk
Pretty weird - can't say as it works for me though.


I agree, that is just what I can do when trying to fix a photo and I end up putting it in the recycle bin. The sky the trees the foreground. Just not working for me at all. I think I'd ask for a refund. :-)

MattO
09/20/2006 10:02:53 AM · #9
Here's my try at HDR with Photomatrix
First, this is the pic from the camera:


This is my usual editing:


And this is the HDR attempt:


I find it gives out intriguing and "different" pics.
09/20/2006 10:10:01 AM · #10
Originally posted by lifternessjt:

Here's my try at HDR with Photomatrix
First, this is the pic from the camera:


This is my usual editing:


And this is the HDR attempt:


I find it gives out intriguing and "different" pics.


I think somewhere in between your usual editing and the HDR version is where it needs to be. Your usual editing version seems a bit washed out however the HDR seems over saturated and unnatural. It just depends what outcome you want from the editing.

The HDR looks more like a painters rendition rather than a photograph. I do like it though.
09/20/2006 10:23:55 AM · #11
You should check out traveler2020, he has some real nice HDR images in his portfolio.
09/20/2006 10:27:04 AM · #12
Originally posted by ZorbaTheGeek:


I also have had no success with CS2s built in HDR tools, instead using a luminance selection and masking to combine my bracketed exposures. I could write up a quick tutorial if people were interested, but it really is very easy. Most photoshoppers can work it out for themselves fairly quickly if not using the technique already =).


I like easy - a tutorial would be welcomed by me.
09/20/2006 10:37:12 AM · #13
Originally posted by cpanaioti:

...I think somewhere in between your usual editing and the HDR version is where it needs to be. Your usual editing version seems a bit washed out however the HDR seems over saturated and unnatural. It just depends what outcome you want from the editing.

The HDR looks more like a painters rendition rather than a photograph. I do like it though.

From what I've read the best results for HDR will be on images with a wide range of values or extremes. Images maybe that you would normally have to work on to bring out an underexposed foreground that is competing with a dramatic background (sky, sunset, etc...).

The image posted by lifternessjt doesn't really seem to fit the typical image that using HDR would benefit. Yes/No?
09/20/2006 10:40:08 AM · #14
hmmmm...
I tried the HDR system in CS2 and found it to work very well.
Took 3 pics on a tripod, one stop over, one stop under, and when "assembled"
had great tonal range, detail in shadows and great highlights. Or at least I thought so.
I had been wanting to try something with a lot of difference in brightness and deep shadows.


Message edited by author 2006-09-20 10:46:00.
09/20/2006 10:44:11 AM · #15
Originally posted by glad2badad:


The image posted by lifternessjt doesn't really seem to fit the typical image that using HDR would benefit. Yes/No?

Yes I think so. Seems the most dramatic effects from HDR come from cloud formations. I had a clear blue (Dull blue) sky to deal with.
09/20/2006 10:49:40 AM · #16
Originally posted by lifternessjt:

Yes I think so. Seems the most dramatic effects from HDR come from cloud formations. I had a clear blue (Dull blue) sky to deal with.


I would certainly agree with this. My wife and I have been playing with HDR using Photomatix for a while, and her recent free study is a good example of how HDR can really create some dramatic clouds.

Free Study XII entry: Original:
09/20/2006 11:18:29 AM · #17
Originally posted by BradP:

hmmmm...
I tried the HDR system in CS2 and found it to work very well.
Took 3 pics on a tripod, one stop over, one stop under, and when "assembled"
had great tonal range, detail in shadows and great highlights. Or at least I thought so.
I had been wanting to try something with a lot of difference in brightness and deep shadows.


These are the 3 originals, resized only:


Message edited by author 2006-11-10 11:12:20.
09/20/2006 11:25:31 AM · #18
Originally posted by BradP:

hmmmm...
I tried the HDR system in CS2 and found it to work very well.
Took 3 pics on a tripod, one stop over, one stop under, and when "assembled"
had great tonal range, detail in shadows and great highlights. Or at least I thought so.
I had been wanting to try something with a lot of difference in brightness and deep shadows.


Brad - Excellent example of what HDR should do, IMO. Not at all cartoonish or garishly colored, but rather, very natural looking with excellent dynamic range.
09/20/2006 12:01:21 PM · #19
Originally posted by cryan:

You should check out traveler2020, he has some real nice HDR images in his portfolio.


Took a while to find, but here's his profile: traveller2020

It's interesting stuff, but for starters I think I'm looking to go more in the naturalish direction of BradP or dwterry.

Good thread!

Message edited by author 2006-09-20 12:01:48.
09/20/2006 12:06:47 PM · #20
People (especially Brad, LOL),

HDR is one thing, and Tone Mapping is another layer on top of that. The purpose of tone mapping is to take an expanded image and control the way it is represented on the screen, because the tone-mapped image has a MUCH greater dynamic range than the screen can render.

As stated at the beginning, THIS particular example of tone mapping is off-the-charts weird. I am experimenting with it as an effect, and pushed it to its extremes in this case, something I do a lot. I found it so intriguing I posted it up, but I'm not saying it's GOOD, far from it. I have an HDR-only version of the image that's very nice as well, but I have a conversion problem with that one right now because I made the mistake of saving it as a floating-point Tiff and PS7 won't open it. Gonna try to fix that today.

In the meanwhile, I have another, much more "regular" tone-mapped version of a completely different picture that's my current Free Study entry, unless something better comes along, and of course I can't reveal that one right now. Indeed, that's the image I broke down and BOUGHT the Photomatix license on account of; hours of work were unable to produce the result I visualized for that particular image.

And yeah, Brad, I paid 99 bux for it :-) Remember, I don't HAVE CS2, and can't run it until I upgrade my computer operating system, so this was my only viable HDR solution in the meanwhile, and I have been needing it more and more lately.

Robt.


09/20/2006 12:41:01 PM · #21
just in case anyone wants a little more info on HDR, here's a link
09/20/2006 12:54:49 PM · #22
And here's the same image run through HDR without tone mapping:



Robt.
09/20/2006 01:07:57 PM · #23
Here's a fine example of tone mapping in an extreme situation, from the wikipedia article, used by permission:



//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_mapping

Robt.
09/20/2006 02:29:07 PM · #24
I have not finished reading the documentation on HDR, but I would like to know if HDR is possible using a single RAW processed in 3 different Exposure Values or if you really need the 3 different in-camera exposures.

I don't know what would happen inf Photomatix got 3 jpegs from the single RAW, I imagine that you could get higher DR but not as high as 3 different exposures, right?
09/20/2006 02:48:48 PM · #25
Originally posted by patrinus:

I have not finished reading the documentation on HDR, but I would like to know if HDR is possible using a single RAW processed in 3 different Exposure Values or if you really need the 3 different in-camera exposures.

Right -- even a RAW image can't capture the extremes of the tone range at one exposure. It's a matter of the human eye being able to perceive a greater range (more f-stops) of tones than any (practically-available) sensor can sense at any single exposure.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 08:49:01 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 08:49:01 AM EDT.