| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/22/2011 09:28:42 AM · #76 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Wouldn't that DNMC in the current challenge? |
HDR stand for "high dynamic range" - you use some sort of methodology to explore and exploit the dynamic range of a photograph. A commonly accepted method is to take several differently exposed shots of the same scene, then use software to mix and match the exposures into a single finished product. Another method is to use software to explore the range already existing in a single exposure - "up" the darks, mute the "highs", etc. It is indeed a valid but perhaps less effective means of exploring and eploiting the dynamic range. So no, it is not "DNMC" and yes, you can do HDR of moving subjects.
Make sense? |
Yes, well stated.
The faux HDR from one image is an okay idea, but has limited effectiveness. If the photographed scene is not too extreme from highlights to shadows, then the faux HDR can produce some interesting results. But, you can recover details in the shadows and highlights using other methods than HDR. If the photographed scene has, for example ten camera stops of light between the shadows and the details, then detail is going to be lost in the highlights, or shadows, or both. That lost detail is going to be unrecoverable via the one image faux HDR method. The wide dynamic range scene is best handled with multiple exposures HDR. (varying only the shutter speed... keeping aperture size and focal length static)
Message edited by author 2011-11-22 09:30:00. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 09:36:48 AM · #77 |
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
No, I didn't mean it as "I am on the hunt to find DNMC images", I simply wanted to know how it was done so future entries of mine don't get hammered by the DNMC hungry members. that's all. |
Okay- didn't mean for my other responses to sound flippant.
Truth be told, it's really something that's up in the air. The "how to" is well established, surely. The "how does DPC interpret that" is always and will eternally be up for grabs," hence my earlier flippant response. I had the exact same conversation with a friend via PM-
I said, verbatim-
"I guess it comes down to how you want to direct your entry- towards using HDR to get that "look" that people associate with HDR (typically oversatted and too much local contrast) or if you want to use HDR to simply expand the dynamic range of a photo. Both will be appreciated by different crowds, and it's a gamble for which to go for. "
If you're purely aiming for a score, I think you're missing the idea that I'm aiming for. Go for it, and best of luck to you, but it isn't entirely my cup of tea. I use DPC as a learning venue, something to gauge my abilities in, sure. But I don't ever assume it is the DEFINITION of this or that technique. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 09:50:59 AM · #78 |
Originally posted by gyaban:
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
This maybe an ignorant question to some of you pros, but how is an HDR image aquired of a moving subject? If at least two or three exposures are required, how are some of the shots not looking like double exposures. What I mean is how is the moving subject a solid peice if HDR requires more than one exposure?
Not sure if that makes sense, but hopefully someone knows what I mean... |
Within advanced rules, you can't. Outside of them, you can take a shot exposed for your main (moving) subject, for example a car over a very bright (or very dark) background, then shoot other photos a few seconds later to get good exposition(s) of the background (without the car). Then blend the whole (manually, probably). |
I don't think you can do it with Canon but Nikon permits you to combine two shots for an overlay, in-camera. So, as long as the framing etc didn't change, you could pull it off. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 09:51:09 AM · #79 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
No, I didn't mean it as "I am on the hunt to find DNMC images", I simply wanted to know how it was done so future entries of mine don't get hammered by the DNMC hungry members. that's all. |
Okay- didn't mean for my other responses to sound flippant.
Truth be told, it's really something that's up in the air. The "how to" is well established, surely. The "how does DPC interpret that" is always and will eternally be up for grabs," hence my earlier flippant response. I had the exact same conversation with a friend via PM-
I said, verbatim-
"I guess it comes down to how you want to direct your entry- towards using HDR to get that "look" that people associate with HDR (typically oversatted and too much local contrast) or if you want to use HDR to simply expand the dynamic range of a photo. Both will be appreciated by different crowds, and it's a gamble for which to go for. "
If you're purely aiming for a score, I think you're missing the idea that I'm aiming for. Go for it, and best of luck to you, but it isn't entirely my cup of tea. I use DPC as a learning venue, something to gauge my abilities in, sure. But I don't ever assume it is the DEFINITION of this or that technique. |
I agree
Message edited by author 2011-11-22 10:04:48. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:05:39 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Originally posted by bassbone:
PseudoHDR in advanced. |
I think you already answered that... |
I think you'd often be hard pressed to tell the difference between a true HDR from multiple exposures and a HDR from a single exposure, if done correctly. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:13:31 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Originally posted by bassbone:
PseudoHDR in advanced. |
I think you already answered that... |
I think you'd often be hard pressed to tell the difference between a true HDR from multiple exposures and a HDR from a single exposure, if done correctly. |
But the "correctly" part is the entire discussion that's being had here. You are just as arbitrarily saying what is correct as the next, hence the issue. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:19:03 AM · #82 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Originally posted by bassbone:
PseudoHDR in advanced. |
I think you already answered that... |
I think you'd often be hard pressed to tell the difference between a true HDR from multiple exposures and a HDR from a single exposure, if done correctly. |
But the "correctly" part is the entire discussion that's being had here. You are just as arbitrarily saying what is correct as the next, hence the issue. |
And my question was about "moving subjects"... |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:25:57 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
And my question was about "moving subjects"... |
But the question is the same. Technique wise, you can do a "pesudo" HDR and achieve the results that look overly HDR and those that look like a light dosage of HDR. You can also perhaps do a traditional HDR depending upon how fat your subject is moving with multiple captures and suffer the same issue.
My point is it doesn't have anything to do with the process... you can tonemap the hell out of a single non pseudo HDR'd image and people will think it's HDR. It's a nonsensical view of the subject. Do what you think is HDR and do it to the best of your ability. Read up on things, and make your own arbitrary decision. That's all I mean. My own view is not right, nor is the winner of the challenge. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:26:10 AM · #84 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Originally posted by bassbone:
PseudoHDR in advanced. |
I think you already answered that... |
I think you'd often be hard pressed to tell the difference between a true HDR from multiple exposures and a HDR from a single exposure, if done correctly. |
But the "correctly" part is the entire discussion that's being had here. You are just as arbitrarily saying what is correct as the next, hence the issue. |
It would be impossible for me, you or anyone else to qualify what "correctly" is since it differs for the individual making the image, and the viewer seeing the image. That is the artistic input that everyone brings and can not be writ in stone -- everyone has a different opinion on HDR, like grain, overblown highlights etc. Neither single exposure, nor multiple exposures are better...they're just different tools to be used when appropriate.
Regarding moving subject, under the traditional +2, 0, -2...it would be near impossible to capture an HDR of a moving subject. Unless, you do the HDR effect and then using layer brush in the object from one of the exposures. Illegal in advanced, hence the use of single exposure.
Message edited by author 2011-11-22 10:28:28. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:27:56 AM · #85 |
Originally posted by gcoulson:
It would be impossible for me, you or anyone else to qualify what "correctly" is since it differs for the individual making the image, and the viewer seeing the image. That is the artistic input that everyone brings and can not be writ in stone -- everyone has a different opinion on HDR, like grain, overblown highlights etc. Neither single exposure, nor multiple exposures are better...they're just different tools to be used when appropriate. |
I agree. Therein is the problem of this thread. Everybody saying what is the "correct" amount of HDR and all the entrants wondering... did I do the correct amount? What can I expect? Will my score be high?
Yet, here are still, debating the "most correct." |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:30:10 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by gcoulson:
It would be impossible for me, you or anyone else to qualify what "correctly" is since it differs for the individual making the image, and the viewer seeing the image. That is the artistic input that everyone brings and can not be writ in stone -- everyone has a different opinion on HDR, like grain, overblown highlights etc. Neither single exposure, nor multiple exposures are better...they're just different tools to be used when appropriate. |
I agree. Therein is the problem of this thread. Everybody saying what is the "correct" amount of HDR and all the entrants wondering... did I do the correct amount? What can I expect? Will my score be high?
Yet, here are still, debating the "most correct." |
Like every other challenge, submit an entry that you like and be willing to accept you will never please everybody. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:33:19 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by gcoulson:
It would be impossible for me, you or anyone else to qualify what "correctly" is since it differs for the individual making the image, and the viewer seeing the image. That is the artistic input that everyone brings and can not be writ in stone -- everyone has a different opinion on HDR, like grain, overblown highlights etc. Neither single exposure, nor multiple exposures are better...they're just different tools to be used when appropriate. |
I agree. Therein is the problem of this thread. Everybody saying what is the "correct" amount of HDR and all the entrants wondering... did I do the correct amount? What can I expect? Will my score be high?
Yet, here are still, debating the "most correct." |
Like every other challenge, submit an entry that you like and be willing to accept you will never please everybody. |
I think then, in this statement, it's all settled. :)
ETA: (I'm serious...I'd like to hope this is where it ends)
Message edited by author 2011-11-22 10:33:47. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:40:43 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Regarding moving subject, under the traditional +2, 0, -2...it would be near impossible to capture an HDR of a moving subject. Unless, you do the HDR effect and then using layer brush in the object from one of the exposures. Illegal in advanced, hence the use of single exposure. |
Thank you, that was all I was looking for. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 10:44:25 AM · #89 |
And let's not forget that "HDR" can be applied in both directions. This discussion seems to be focused on the ways people can compress the tonal range, but equally valid, and perhaps more useful, to me at least, is using HDR/tone mapping techniques to expand the tonal range of flat scenes.
The first of these was a "true" HDR, from 3 originals; the middle original is linked in the comments. The second shot made top-10 in the last HDR challenge, and it was created from a single original, also linked in the comments. In both cases, the originals were quite flat-looking. "Preserving detail" was not an issue here, just the manipulation of the overall tonal range.
 
R.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2011 11:08:55 AM · #90 |
Originally posted by ubique:
Looking at HDR photographs is like attending a concert by a symphony orchestra where every instrument is played simultaneously at maximum volume for 3 hours. It's excruciating, and it murders the music.
(P.S. Apologies (actually, doubly so) to my friend  Bear_Music) |
Yes!
If there are halos, you've overdone it!
If the viewers eyes start bleeding after viewing the photo, you've overdone it!
|
|
|
|
11/22/2011 11:23:18 AM · #91 |
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
This maybe an ignorant question to some of you pros, but how is an HDR image aquired of a moving subject? If at least two or three exposures are required, how are some of the shots not looking like double exposures. What I mean is how is the moving subject a solid peice if HDR requires more than one exposure?
Not sure if that makes sense, but hopefully someone knows what I mean... |
Photomatix is great in that it offers 2 automatic methods for deghosting (for moving water, foliage and similar) and a semi automatic one. The latter allows to manually select the areas ghosted due to moving subjects and then select a frame to draw your subject from. The software than attempts and reconstructing the rest from the background based on the other frames.
Obviously, the range expansion in the selected areas is limited to a single exposure. I find it useful for relatively small areas. Otherwise, as other said you could use a single exposure, but that's more for getting an obvious HDR look than for coping with a large dynamic range, IMHO.
Photomatix is also very good at automatically align and rotate images in case of handheld exposure.
For instance, this was taken handheld and alignment and deghosting were both very useful:
same for this one (bit cheesy result, but anyway):
Other softwares have deghosting, but I found photomatix more effective in that respect (and for auto align as well).
For instance, Oloneo PhotoEngine is a very cool software, but align and deghosting (auto only) are not that great.
In this one, for instance, deghosting of leaves didn't quite work:
|
|
|
|
11/22/2011 01:10:12 PM · #92 |
Ok Another legal question...
Lets say a single image Won the contest, either a puedo, or by changeing the exposure several times in RAW editor. When that person sends in a file it's only 1 image. Would they be DQ'd for only 1 file submitted??????? |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 01:25:52 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by littlemav:
Ok Another legal question...
Lets say a single image Won the contest, either a puedo, or by changeing the exposure several times in RAW editor. When that person sends in a file it's only 1 image. Would they be DQ'd for only 1 file submitted??????? |
Photos are only disqualified for failing to follow the editing rules sets highlighted under "Challenge Rules". Photos are not disqualified for perceived infractions related to the challenge title or challenge description.
For example, an all red photo submitted in an 'all green' challenge would never be disqualified for being the incorrect color, but it would likely be scored badly.
Message edited by author 2011-11-22 13:27:46. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 02:55:18 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by littlemav:
Ok Another legal question...
Lets say a single image Won the contest, either a puedo, or by changeing the exposure several times in RAW editor. When that person sends in a file it's only 1 image. Would they be DQ'd for only 1 file submitted??????? |
Sheesh, how many dupe accounts do you have? I only submitted one file. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 02:59:14 PM · #95 |
| Why would you consider a single image RAW submission not an HDR if it had been sent to PS as 5 or 7 different exposure adjustments and processed no differently than a JPEG shot in camera with those same adjustments? The only real difference to my mind is the possible clipping and blocking, but if you could get the whole scene in one histogram you could get a fine HDR in a single shot. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 03:38:04 PM · #96 |
I see no point in debating ad nauseum about what is and is not HDR, since most of us can't really tell for sure just by looking at the picture.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2011 04:01:45 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
I see no point in debating ad nauseum about what is and is not HDR, since most of us can't really tell for sure just by looking at the picture. |
+1 Same goes for many of the challenge discussions TBH.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2011 04:05:28 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by sinistral_leo:
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Regarding moving subject, under the traditional +2, 0, -2...it would be near impossible to capture an HDR of a moving subject. Unless, you do the HDR effect and then using layer brush in the object from one of the exposures. Illegal in advanced, hence the use of single exposure. |
Thank you, that was all I was looking for. |
Just to belabor the issue, it is NOT impossible to represent a moving object in HDR. You beat the bushes of this thread until you got the answer you wanted, but it isn't correct. There are many legal possibilities to submit an HDR image of a moving subject. Holster your DNMC weapons. |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 04:41:35 PM · #99 |
I really think that whether it is a single exposure or multi exposure HDR is not important!! When the cameras move from 14-bit recording to 16 or 18-bit it will be possible to capture a far greater dynamic range in one exposure, including moving objects! HDR PP is not just about putting light in the shadows, I also use HDR to bring out the colors (Photomatix is very good at giving reasonably natural colors if you choose that path), and to increase tonal range for B&W images. I really think that experimenting with HDR can improve PP choices dramatically.
PS Now, HDR-haters, shred the above to pieces ;) |
|
|
|
11/22/2011 05:53:45 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by littlemav:
Ok Another legal question...
Lets say a single image Won the contest, either a puedo, or by changeing the exposure several times in RAW editor. When that person sends in a file it's only 1 image. Would they be DQ'd for only 1 file submitted??????? |
Sheesh, how many dupe accounts do you have? I only submitted one file. |
Hey bohemka You musta missed something in the translation .... I was reffering to some one who WON the challenge, submitting a SINGLE image shot as opposed to a 3 to 5 image shot for VALIDATION...
I have ONE account... on DPC like it LEGALLY SAY'S you may Have. Don't appreciate your little SNARKY REMARK. I am sure that you misunderstood, because, YOU could NOT have submitted a file after a win SINCE THIS ISN'T OVER WITH!!!
Not to mention all this is mute, I went back and reread the rules.. it says "You should employ HDR techniques when making your entry this week" TECHNIQUES... defines and allows the use of any type of HDR action and not just shooting a true HDR. Makeing my origional post not relative to any of this discussion.
Message edited by author 2011-11-22 17:56:37. |
|
