| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/07/2008 11:43:53 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Are you allowed to combine exposures of different lengths? |
Can't remember anything in the news rules saying you can't. So, its HDRI meets Milky Waters then lol? |
Well ya, can I use a short exposure for the foilage and a long exposure for the water and take the best of both worlds for the final shot? |
|
|
|
01/07/2008 11:51:24 AM · #27 |
SC already said it's legal for aperture ... why not shutter
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Are you allowed to combine exposures of different lengths? |
Can't remember anything in the news rules saying you can't. So, its HDRI meets Milky Waters then lol? |
Well ya, can I use a short exposure for the foilage and a long exposure for the water and take the best of both worlds for the final shot? |
|
|
|
|
01/07/2008 12:11:53 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by hopper:
SC already said it's legal for aperture ... why not shutter
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Are you allowed to combine exposures of different lengths? |
Can't remember anything in the news rules saying you can't. So, its HDRI meets Milky Waters then lol? |
Well ya, can I use a short exposure for the foilage and a long exposure for the water and take the best of both worlds for the final shot? |
|
Kind of makes sense. Part of the intent on the multiple exposure allowance is for the use of HDR. If you wanted to grab various exposures to combine the shutter/aperture combination is going to fluctuate between exposures anyway. |
|
|
|
01/07/2008 01:39:06 PM · #29 |
| Wouldn̢۪t you know it, a River and Stream challenge and I̢۪m in North Carolina where we̢۪ve been in a drought since June. Most of the rivers and streams are very low or dry. One of our main rivers looks like a small creek with a huge shoreline. This one will require much deep thought. Flowing water in my area is basically non-existent. (Except at the sewer treatment plant) |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 11:43:00 AM · #30 |
Does a canal consititute a river/stream? Not too many rivers near me apart from the Thames and I'd rather not shoot a long exposure 'postcard' shot from one of the bridges...but I do have canals. And am I likely to get DNMC by the harsher voters?
N
EDIT: Wiki defines them as "Canals are artificial channels for water" which maybe suggests that they're not...? (it does say 'or similar' in the challenge description though)
Message edited by author 2008-01-09 11:45:08. |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 11:50:59 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by apashack:
Wouldn̢۪t you know it, a River and Stream challenge and I̢۪m in North Carolina where we̢۪ve been in a drought since June. Most of the rivers and streams are very low or dry. One of our main rivers looks like a small creek with a huge shoreline. This one will require much deep thought. Flowing water in my area is basically non-existent. (Except at the sewer treatment plant) |
Maybe try checking out maps.google.com to find out where the larger bodies of water are in your area? I just did a search of my local area using it and found a water reservoir that looks from the satellite photos that I might be able to shoot a part of it as a river. Obviously look for the blue and then narrow down your search/decisions using the zoomed in satellite to get a better idea of location.
N |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 11:57:30 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Kind of makes sense. Part of the intent on the multiple exposure allowance is for the use of HDR. If you wanted to grab various exposures to combine the shutter/aperture combination is going to fluctuate between exposures anyway. |
I've had a bit of a nightmare with this too. I tried shooting a time lapse image keeping the aperture constant but only realised too late why it was a bad idea. The intention was to keep everything sharp but obviously the camera metered from available light and extended exposure time and kept the lighting very static. The other problem was that when exposures were >30s it overlapped my remote timer, so I had to keep exposures below 30 for a 30s repeat. If you have any suggestions as to the best way, please let me know (maybe in another more relevant thread, sorry for the derail). I think next time I'd do it manually and meter for each individual shot/bracket set to try to get minimum aperture possible, or maybe one of the Canon's preset modes to preserve DoF (the landscape one?).
N |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 12:04:46 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by fastforward:
Does a canal consititute a river/stream? Not too many rivers near me apart from the Thames and I'd rather not shoot a long exposure 'postcard' shot from one of the bridges...but I do have canals. And am I likely to get DNMC by the harsher voters?
N
EDIT: Wiki defines them as "Canals are artificial channels for water" which maybe suggests that they're not...? (it does say 'or similar' in the challenge description though) |
It wouldn't have occurred to me that anyone would consider a canal as DNMC. As far as I am concerned a photo of a canal would be a perfectly valid entry. |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 12:11:21 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by fastforward:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Kind of makes sense. Part of the intent on the multiple exposure allowance is for the use of HDR. If you wanted to grab various exposures to combine the shutter/aperture combination is going to fluctuate between exposures anyway. |
I've had a bit of a nightmare with this too. I tried shooting a time lapse image keeping the aperture constant but only realised too late why it was a bad idea. The intention was to keep everything sharp but obviously the camera metered from available light and extended exposure time and kept the lighting very static. The other problem was that when exposures were >30s it overlapped my remote timer, so I had to keep exposures below 30 for a 30s repeat. If you have any suggestions as to the best way, please let me know (maybe in another more relevant thread, sorry for the derail). I think next time I'd do it manually and meter for each individual shot/bracket set to try to get minimum aperture possible, or maybe one of the Canon's preset modes to preserve DoF (the landscape one?).
N |
When I run into this situation I put camera on "bulb" setting and use my remote to trigger it and time it manually.
I think if you use one of those special modes like landscape it may change your aperture depending on the scene, but I don't use 'em so I'm not sure. |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 12:14:28 PM · #35 |
| HDR is allowed on this challenge right? |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 12:16:08 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:
HDR is allowed on this challenge right? |
Don't bother.
Oops, this belongs in LoD thread. :P |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 12:47:40 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by fastforward:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Kind of makes sense. Part of the intent on the multiple exposure allowance is for the use of HDR. If you wanted to grab various exposures to combine the shutter/aperture combination is going to fluctuate between exposures anyway. |
I've had a bit of a nightmare with this too. I tried shooting a time lapse image keeping the aperture constant but only realised too late why it was a bad idea. The intention was to keep everything sharp but obviously the camera metered from available light and extended exposure time and kept the lighting very static. The other problem was that when exposures were >30s it overlapped my remote timer, so I had to keep exposures below 30 for a 30s repeat. If you have any suggestions as to the best way, please let me know (maybe in another more relevant thread, sorry for the derail). I think next time I'd do it manually and meter for each individual shot/bracket set to try to get minimum aperture possible, or maybe one of the Canon's preset modes to preserve DoF (the landscape one?).
N |
For HDRI work, manual is always your best bet. Choose an aperture, then manually bracket shutter speeds to create your overs and unders. If you are unwilling/unable to use manual, set camera at on Av, choose your aperture, and use EV compensation to generate your overs and unders. If you are trying to do HDRI on subjects that may be showing slight movement, it can be an advantage to shoot Burst mode in AEB (auto exposure bracket) so as to get the resultant images as close together, time-wise, as possible. You would do this in Av mode, of course, so the bracketing happens with the shutter speed.
HDTR imaging is a different kettle of fish. Here, the exposures are spread out over a considerable span of time. What I'd do is shoot a bracketed set of exposures for each segment of the time lapse, then choose the best ones for the final composite. I would assume it's allowed to do an HDRI image of each segment of the time lapse, then combine the merged/tone mapped segments into the single composite image, but I'd imagine this would create some serious merging problems as the different segments could var wildly in final appearance... Also, you're limited to 10 exposures total for your final composite, which would mean only 3 segments for the end product since you'd be using 3 exposures (minimum) to generate each segment in HDRI.
R.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2008 12:56:23 PM · #38 |
I find HDR for waterfalls is generally more trouble than it's worth. At the most I do some manual HDR where I pick and choose portions from different exposures. Photomatix will give you lots of artifact because the waterfall tends to move the foilage around quite a bit.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2008 01:18:38 PM · #39 |
| I suspect that unless you are a master of HDR or able to combine multiple images, it'll be a tough slug for a standard image with the old rules. This challenge is likely going to exhibit somes weaknesses in the new Advanced Rules as many people may not have the software needed to combine multiple captures and/or do HDR. Not too say that it is bad to use those processes but it will spotlight what many gripe about .. too much emphasis on post processing. I'd say we're in for another trend to develop like we saw with selective desat, grunge, draganizing, yada yada yada. With those past trends, there was overkill and it became boring and resented to the extent you were punsihed if you employed any of those techniques in subsequent challenges. It'll be interesting to see a new trend re-emerge as everybody flocks to redemonstrate their ability to HDR the heck out of everything while combining multiple images of leaves flowing downstream. I think I'll sit out advanced editing for a while until this passes and some normalcy prevails. |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 01:54:37 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
I suspect that unless you are a master of HDR or able to combine multiple images, it'll be a tough slug for a standard image with the old rules... |
I think this is SO overreacting. For all practical purposes HDRI has been allowed all along in advanced editing; just not "true" HDRI, using multiple actual exposures. But HDRI-from-RAW using a single exposure has always been legal, and in the majority of cases it is really all you need. Even now, it is sometimes preferable, so you don't have moving-elements alignment problems. And HDRI has NOT dominated the results at all. We have had a bunch of HDRI images score well, but why not? Used properly, it is a very dramatic way of rendering an image. But there are plenty of other "dramatic" approaches to photography that don't require merging images.
There's a pretty good chance that in THIS challenge the top images will have a lot of HDRI amongst them, but that's because this is a landscape challenge, and HDRI is especially effective on landscapes. The best landscape shooters among us know this, and use it often, although often "invisibly". So it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy for this challenge.
But think about this; these "best landscape photographers" would still be the best even if HDRI were not allowed, and they'd still finish high in the voting. So what has changed?
R.
Message edited by author 2008-01-09 13:55:18.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2008 01:58:10 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
I suspect that unless you are a master of HDR or able to combine multiple images, it'll be a tough slug for a standard image with the old rules. This challenge is likely going to exhibit somes weaknesses in the new Advanced Rules as many people may not have the software needed to combine multiple captures and/or do HDR. Not too say that it is bad to use those processes but it will spotlight what many gripe about .. too much emphasis on post processing. I'd say we're in for another trend to develop like we saw with selective desat, grunge, draganizing, yada yada yada. With those past trends, there was overkill and it became boring and resented to the extent you were punsihed if you employed any of those techniques in subsequent challenges. It'll be interesting to see a new trend re-emerge as everybody flocks to redemonstrate their ability to HDR the heck out of everything while combining multiple images of leaves flowing downstream. I think I'll sit out advanced editing for a while until this passes and some normalcy prevails. |
I think you would be wise to enter this challenge based on the work in your porfolio! |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 02:36:34 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Ivo:
I suspect that unless you are a master of HDR or able to combine multiple images, it'll be a tough slug for a standard image with the old rules... |
I think this is SO overreacting. For all practical purposes HDRI has been allowed all along in advanced editing; just not "true" HDRI, using multiple actual exposures. But HDRI-from-RAW using a single exposure has always been legal, and in the majority of cases it is really all you need. Even now, it is sometimes preferable, so you don't have moving-elements alignment problems. And HDRI has NOT dominated the results at all. We have had a bunch of HDRI images score well, but why not? Used properly, it is a very dramatic way of rendering an image. But there are plenty of other "dramatic" approaches to photography that don't require merging images.
There's a pretty good chance that in THIS challenge the top images will have a lot of HDRI amongst them, but that's because this is a landscape challenge, and HDRI is especially effective on landscapes. The best landscape shooters among us know this, and use it often, although often "invisibly". So it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy for this challenge.
But think about this; these "best landscape photographers" would still be the best even if HDRI were not allowed, and they'd still finish high in the voting. So what has changed?
R. |
I don't know whether it is an over reaction Robert. I'd say it is moreso a study of the history on this site. Let me clarify: I do not see anything wrong with Post Processing as I use it quite regularly with me entries. The point I'm trying to make is that the challenge will very likely be driven by cool by "Photoshop Enhancements" because we are "Free at Last" to use them. I'd say there will be a significant spike in the overuse of the "allowable changes" to the extent it will be the "trend of the day". I also understand you employ HDR and this is made evident in your top scoring images. Will they have scored as high without HDR enhancements? It is unrealistic to look in a rear view mirror and make a blanket assumption that this is the reason but you cannot deny that HDR dominated challenges because it was the new and cool thing to do.
BTW: I really enjoy your landscapes and wish I had your vision and skill when it comes to the use of HDR. I'll give you at Tim Horton's coffee if you teach me. ;-) Peace. |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 02:50:43 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
There's a pretty good chance that in THIS challenge the top images will have a lot of HDRI amongst them, but that's because this is a landscape challenge, and HDRI is especially effective on landscapes. The best landscape shooters among us know this, and use it often, although often "invisibly". |
I think this bears (no pun intended) repeating. IMO, the best HDR is done "invisibly" and not driven to cartoonish levels. I suspect those that look overprocessed will not score well. |
|
|
|
01/09/2008 02:58:45 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I find HDR for waterfalls is generally more trouble than it's worth. At the most I do some manual HDR where I pick and choose portions from different exposures. Photomatix will give you lots of artifact because the waterfall tends to move the foilage around quite a bit. |
Worried about movement in a multi-exposure shoot? I'm working on a DPC Tutorial about Smart Objects and single image HDR. In a nutshell:
In CS3 (not sure about CS2), you can take one image in RAW, then in ACR, and process it for one section (say the ground in a landscape photo), then convert it to s Smart Object (SO), not a tiff or other image format. From PS, copy that SO into another layer, then that new layer (the SO) can opened directly into ACR when you edit it.
From ACR, process that SO for the sky (or other area). When you return to PS, you can mask out the second layer's ground area, apply a black-to-white linear gradient to smooth the transition from ground to sky, and presto!...you have a single image HDR photo without worry about items in the composition that may have been moving.
If you have multiple areas that you want to concentrate on, then create another SO and process it for that area. You can have many layers of Smart Objects--you'll run out of memory before you hit any hard ceilings.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2008 03:09:19 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
...The point I'm trying to make is that the challenge will very likely be driven by cool by "Photoshop Enhancements" because we are "Free at Last" to use them. I'd say there will be a significant spike in the overuse of the "allowable changes" to the extent it will be the "trend of the day". I also understand you employ HDR and this is made evident in your top scoring images. Will they have scored as high without HDR enhancements? It is unrealistic to look in a rear view mirror and make a blanket assumption that this is the reason but you cannot deny that HDR dominated challenges because it was the new and cool thing to do.
BTW: I really enjoy your landscapes and wish I had your vision and skill when it comes to the use of HDR. I'll give you at Tim Horton's coffee if you teach me. ;-) Peace. |
I understand what you're saying, but a few points:
1. HDRI has effectively been with us for a long time, just not "true" HDRI (multiple actual exposures) and it has not been wildly dominant.
2. My top scoring images, as you point out, use a lot of HDR-like processing; but only one of them is "true" HDRI (from an expert challenge). One of them, this one,
doesn't even use any sort of HDR blending, because I hadn't found out about it yet; I used "contrast masking" on this one, a tool available to any Photoshopper, and I only used THAT because I didn't have CS with its shadow/highlight feature, which would have done a better job.
3. Finally, the REASON why these various techniques are being used is either because the scenes themselves are extraordinarily contrasty, and to render them properly requires some sort of tonal compression, or, contrariwise, because the scene is very flat and requires contrast enhancement to do the job; that would be the Ecola Point shot and the self-portrait. So I don't quite understand your point; all those shots except "Winter Sunset" were legal under the earlier advanced rules, and represent a type of processing available to any photoshopper. If people aren't using it because they don't understand how to use it, in what way does this make it an unreasonable advantage for those of us who DO know how to work with the extreme tonal ranges of real-life scenes?
R.
|
|
|
|
01/13/2008 09:59:28 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by ralph:
hmm... 95% of everything is ice covered here ....
makes for a zzzzz pic .. |
An we have lots of dry Texas creek beds here. |
|
|
|
01/13/2008 10:07:00 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
IMO, the best HDR is done "invisibly" and not driven to cartoonish levels. I suspect those that look overprocessed will not score well. |
A BIG amen to that. Over-HDR usage has become my new biggest pet peeve. I can remember when someone discovered selective desaturation here for the first time years ago, and people were using it like crazy, whether appropriately or not. And now it's HDR. Bleech. |
|
|
|
01/13/2008 10:42:48 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
I think this bears (no pun intended) repeating. IMO, the best HDR is done "invisibly" and not driven to cartoonish levels. I suspect those that look overprocessed will not score well. |
I think I have to agree with this theory. My December freestudy entry had a highly processed appearance and several of the comments led me to believe that was what kept it in the high 5's instead of hitting a six. The kind of thing that either you like, or you don't because it does not look as much like a photo anymore. (It's still one of my personal faves, tho.) |
|
|
|
01/13/2008 11:58:19 PM · #49 |
| No HDR on my shot. Hoping it's good enough for a Top 10 and maybe even better. We shall see... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/18/2025 05:45:22 PM EDT.
