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

Threads will be shown in descending order for the remainder of this session. To permanently display posts in this order, adjust your preferences.
DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> How do I combine diff. exposures of a RAW file?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 40, descending (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/29/2006 03:16:27 PM · #1
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:

I have PS/CS not CS2. I use RawEssentials to do some tweaking and convert to TIFF. The do the Merging of two or more exposures in PS/CS. Is that a good thing to do are am I going about it wrong? Is so is there an HDR program that is fee that can be used with CS?

Thanks,
SDW


Fred Miranda's program is only $8.95 I think, and it apparently does a very good job...

R.

Thanks I will look into that.

07/29/2006 02:05:14 PM · #2
Originally posted by Southern Gentleman:

I have PS/CS not CS2. I use RawEssentials to do some tweaking and convert to TIFF. The do the Merging of two or more exposures in PS/CS. Is that a good thing to do are am I going about it wrong? Is so is there an HDR program that is fee that can be used with CS?

Thanks,
SDW


Fred Miranda's program is only $8.95 I think, and it apparently does a very good job...

R.
07/29/2006 02:00:20 PM · #3
I have PS/CS not CS2. I use RawEssentials to do some tweaking and convert to TIFF. The do the Merging of two or more exposures in PS/CS. Is that a good thing to do are am I going about it wrong? Is so is there an HDR program that is fee that can be used with CS?

Thanks,
SDW
07/29/2006 01:43:34 PM · #4
Originally posted by Falc:

OK this is how I do it ....

Slect the RAW image and load it into CS2 (Camera Rady) and decide on a set of values which provide a goo exposure for the darker areas. Usually foreground. Let Camera Raw do its stuff and open the file in CS2. Then save the PSD file as 'base1.psd' or something.

Then go back and select the same image again and open CS2 Camera Ready a second time. This time select a range of settings for the lighter areas. Continue to open the file again this time with the new exposure values.

Now in CS2 I have 2 images open.

So select the second image and 'Select All', 'Edit' 'Copy'
Paste this into the base1.psd as a new layer over the original.

Discard the second psd window.

Now I have 1 image with two layers, layer 1 is the darker image, layer 2 is the lighter. Apply a layer mask to the second layer and paint in black with a soft brush to blend the two layers together.

You can do this with as many layers and as many different setting as you need. I have used upto seven in one image.


Thank you for such an in depth explination of what you do. I will give that a shot. you've explaine dit very well. don't think i'll have any real problems.
07/29/2006 01:33:56 PM · #5
OK this is how I do it ....

Slect the RAW image and load it into CS2 (Camera Rady) and decide on a set of values which provide a goo exposure for the darker areas. Usually foreground. Let Camera Raw do its stuff and open the file in CS2. Then save the PSD file as 'base1.psd' or something.

Then go back and select the same image again and open CS2 Camera Ready a second time. This time select a range of settings for the lighter areas. Continue to open the file again this time with the new exposure values.

Now in CS2 I have 2 images open.

So select the second image and 'Select All', 'Edit' 'Copy'
Paste this into the base1.psd as a new layer over the original.

Discard the second psd window.

Now I have 1 image with two layers, layer 1 is the darker image, layer 2 is the lighter. Apply a layer mask to the second layer and paint in black with a soft brush to blend the two layers together.

You can do this with as many layers and as many different setting as you need. I have used upto seven in one image.
07/29/2006 01:31:45 PM · #6
oh ok. that explains it. probably because i changed a few funtions in tone mapping to see what it would do then didnt remmber the default settings. so I didnt get them back the right way.
07/29/2006 01:28:12 PM · #7
If I'm not mistaken, all but the basic merge function in photomatix produce a watermarked result until you pay for the program. But the basic merge works very well and is free forever as far as i can see.

R.
07/29/2006 01:23:17 PM · #8
yes with photomatix pro. I did another but for some reason this second one has photomatix written all over it so i'm trying a third to see If it will do that again.
07/29/2006 01:15:03 PM · #9
Originally posted by jaded_youth:

That worked Awesome. Thank you! It's not a great photo lol. just a quick snapshot to try this process but I'm psyched now to try it on a good photo. Thank you sooooooooo much.

here it is:


There ya go! A little levels adjustment or curves adjustment to make the image lighter overall and you're totally in business. Was this done with Photomatix Pro?

R.
07/29/2006 12:44:49 PM · #10
I didn't see how/where to use tone mapping in CS2. i'll check that out. Thanks.
07/29/2006 10:08:34 AM · #11
The easiest way I have found to do this stuff is using Dr. Browns Services - Mergamatic tool.

I saw it mentioned in a thread somewhere & tried it.IMHO it is a lot easier & effective than anything I can do manually.
07/29/2006 09:52:18 AM · #12
If you are using CS2's HDR, use tone mapping. It makes for the best results:

07/29/2006 12:33:53 AM · #13
Another neat technique that I've found useful is described in the DPChallenge tutorial "Improving Shadow and Highlight Detail" by timj351.

07/28/2006 10:43:59 PM · #14
That worked Awesome. Thank you! It's not a great photo lol. just a quick snapshot to try this process but I'm psyched now to try it on a good photo. Thank you sooooooooo much.

here it is:
07/28/2006 10:23:19 PM · #15
Check out //www.hdrsoft.com for a downloadable trial version of Photomatix Pro; not all the functions are available in the trial version, but what IS available is exactly what you need to merge TIFF variations made off a RAW file, or jpgs for that matter, and there's no time limit on the trial version. It's really simple to use...

R.
07/28/2006 10:17:33 PM · #16
It would definately seem I'm doing something wrong. I generally wouldn't put it past me. ;)But the process deosn't actually give me much choice to do something wrong. just pick the pictures to be combined. wait a minute while it does its thing then change the slider to make the overall picture darker or brighter(which i did not do for the one posted, i accepted its suggested settings) and thats it. maybe I am missing something. I would hope I am. lol. but as OtisXMike mentioned above in this post it doesnt work on different saved exposures of the same RAW file for some reason so it's not actually that important DPC wise anyway. I'm going to go try and find a few tutorials for this specific process using the merge to HDR option in CS2 and see if i find similar results. Maybe it's just a glitch. not sure how possible that is though.
07/28/2006 10:10:24 PM · #17
I donno about CS2, I've never used it. But it HAS to be better than that, you're not doing something or you're doing something wrong, or something. I did my version in HDRsoft's "Photomatic Pro" and it took all of 15 seconds; there's absolutely NO customizing or further post-processing, though I'm sure it could be improved if I went a couple steps further.

R.
07/28/2006 10:01:55 PM · #18
I was confused too as to how all the definition in the window was lost as two of the three exposures had some. I think masking will be a better option. for your results did you use the CS2 merge to HDR option? Maybe that's where my problems are stemming from. Easier usually doesnt mean better I guess. Here are the actual exposures I used so you can see what I mean about there being some detail in the window before merging. There was only one option I had after merging and before saving to customize the HDR and it did change the white balance but also brought back the shadows in the foreground when changed. kind of a catch 22.

07/28/2006 09:43:57 PM · #19
Originally posted by jaded_youth:

yeah the before is the "correctly" exposed photo. I was using the av mode. and had it set to expose correctly. and then 2 over and 2 under. thats as far as it goes. if i did anything other than the mid exposure than I wouldnt get the full two stops in both directions. does that make sense?


Yeah sure, that makes sense. But in a properly-created HDR image you should be able to have both the room and the view through the window correctly rendered. You're looking for something like this, which is a straight HDR merge of the 2 exposures you showed, with no further adjustments at all:



Robt.
07/28/2006 08:04:24 PM · #20
yeah the before is the "correctly" exposed photo. I was using the av mode. and had it set to expose correctly. and then 2 over and 2 under. thats as far as it goes. if i did anything other than the mid exposure than I wouldnt get the full two stops in both directions. does that make sense?

Message edited by author 2006-07-28 20:05:03.
07/28/2006 06:08:30 PM · #21
I'm not sure how you are doing a before and after pic unless the before is just one of the three or more pics you used in the HDR. Normally in HDR you use at least three pics, one exposed properly and the other two 2 stops under and over exposed. Is the before pic you are comparing the one that is exposed correctly? If so it really is not exposed correctly in the room example. In the landscape example it is about right. Be careful on the first step when setting the white point. If ya mess it up you will never get the full effect you are looking to get. Again in HDR you should be using it to avoid blown out parts of the picture and bring detail out of dark areas. Good luck!
07/28/2006 04:43:01 PM · #22
Uhhh, well... believe me, I know how it feels to have your "studio" filled with crap.
07/28/2006 04:02:27 PM · #23
do you love the disassembled table and the rolled up rug too? You can have 'em! just kidding. that room's going to be the studio and we need to get rid of them for space but we cant even friggen give them away. why does no one want a friggen 1,000 table? It's not cause it's ugly because no one has even gotten to the "coming to look at it" stage. lol it's driving me nuts because i want to move forward with the studio but can't until it's gone. ARGH! See?.... the stress has turned me into a pirate. lol
07/28/2006 03:50:58 PM · #24
Originally posted by jaded_youth:



Well that worked better, everything looks great in the after shot except for the window. so i'm on the right track at least.


The interior definitely looks better. BTW, I love the crown molding in your house. :-)

Message edited by author 2006-07-28 15:51:30.
07/28/2006 03:39:27 PM · #25


Well that worked better, everything looks great in the after shot except for the window. so i'm on the right track at least.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 02:34:00 PM

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 02:34:00 PM EDT.