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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> HDR side challenge when the torture is over?
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 74 of 74, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/15/2010 02:21:19 PM · #51
Thank you Bear! Very much appreciated. I may try it in one of the entries in near future, hope you won't mind:-)

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Prash:
I would be interested in learning from DrAchoo and Bear_Music how they edited their HDRs. I loved both, and it would be great if they are willing share the skills:-):-)


From my photographer's comments:

A flat scene has been expanded using Photomatix Pro and Topaz Detail & Simplify. Uncropped, shot in RAW, processed from single original, gradients added top and bottom, touch of PS Diffuse Glow" to bring up luminance in the water.

The single RAW image:

This was tone mapped in Photomatix Pro to bring pop into the scene. Topaz Detail was used aggressively to bring color and luminance, then Topaz Simplify was used to smooth the whole scene out and give it a dreamy quality. Hue/saturation adjustment was done on an adjustment layer. The purplish hue crept into the sky as an artifact of the above processing, and I decided to keep it. I duped off the final, composite image layer and ran Photoshop's "Diffuse Glow" filter at a low level to bring up the lighter parts of the water surface. the "channels". I added a multiply layer above the whole thing and popped in gradients top and bottom. I resized to 1600 pixels, duped BG and sharpened, repeated twice more, resized to 800 and sorted through the sharpenings, eventually keeping 1 1/2 layers of it; this is "Adamus Sharpening".

R.
06/15/2010 02:43:58 PM · #52
Originally posted by Prash:
I may try it in one of the entries in near future, hope you won't mind:-)


Why on earth would I? Fire away. I don't even think I did an especially good job of it. I just wanted to do something different, and I felt like to have a chance of ribboning I had to do something exaggerated, so...

R.
 06/15/2010 04:44:22 PM · #53
I think this thread was an excellent idea.
Might it even make a good section of the forum by its own accord?

Also, I didn't enter, but have been wanting to try out some HDR stuff for a while now. May I play?
I'd prefer to do some reading about it first, though. Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I have the trial of photomatix and lightroom. My camera doesn't have an automatic HDR exposure setting, so I suppose I'd want to try making them from one shot first, would I?

Message edited by author 2010-06-15 16:46:39.
 06/15/2010 04:55:03 PM · #54
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
A flat scene has been expanded using Photomatix Pro and Topaz Detail & Simplify. Uncropped, shot in RAW, processed from single original, gradients added top and bottom, touch of PS Diffuse Glow" to bring up luminance in the water.

The single RAW image:


Originally posted by comment from LevT:
you made a beautiful (almost) painting out of a dull original which most of us would not bother to keep.


It's worth pointing out, and I can't overemphasize this, that I went out on that foggy morning to that specific spot with the specific intention of taking this picture. The original, as posted above, is exactly what I expected to get, and I knew exactly what I wanted to do with it.

The execution, that was another story :-( I'm not satisfied with the image, it looks clumsy to me. I have to find a better way to do this.

But, in any event, when if you are undertaking zone system/HDR-type work, it's imperative that you learn how to previsualize, and work that into your creative flow. Don't let opportunities pass you by because you haven't learned how to see the finished result in your mind's eye.

Here's another example, from the same location actually:

From this to this

R.
 06/16/2010 12:11:46 AM · #55
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
I think this thread was an excellent idea.
Might it even make a good section of the forum by its own accord?

Also, I didn't enter, but have been wanting to try out some HDR stuff for a while now. May I play?
I'd prefer to do some reading about it first, though. Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I have the trial of photomatix and lightroom. My camera doesn't have an automatic HDR exposure setting, so I suppose I'd want to try making them from one shot first, would I?


Pretty good tutorial at Stuck In Customs
Some good examples of HDR at HDR Spotting

- Alex
 06/16/2010 03:14:38 AM · #56
Originally posted by Alex_Europa:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
I think this thread was an excellent idea.
Might it even make a good section of the forum by its own accord?

Also, I didn't enter, but have been wanting to try out some HDR stuff for a while now. May I play?
I'd prefer to do some reading about it first, though. Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I have the trial of photomatix and lightroom. My camera doesn't have an automatic HDR exposure setting, so I suppose I'd want to try making them from one shot first, would I?


Pretty good tutorial at Stuck In Customs
Some good examples of HDR at HDR Spotting

- Alex


Thanks for the links. I've just spent most of the afternoon exploring the first, and now I feel like I'll have to get into this. (My attempt at this challenge sucked.) I'll check the second link out later, gotta go and cook now.

Eta, I've been in and investigated the HDR Spotting site. Wow! It is really inspiring.

Message edited by author 2010-06-17 20:47:58.
 06/25/2010 12:57:32 PM · #57
Here's another example of manual HDR blending. I can post the originals if people are interested. Basically there are three exposures for fire, tent, background. I almost used it in the challenge, but Caden couldn't hold quite still enough. It was a 20 second exposure for the portion that exposed us.

06/25/2010 01:09:43 PM · #58
I wanted to throw in an example of what the FREE tool HDRtist (only for OS X) can do. It's certainly not the best HDR tool out there, but I bet it's the easiest to use. All you have to do is drag your images, click align (only if photos are not aligned), then change the slider to change the HDR algorithm and strength. I used it for my entry (which wasn't the best), and this recent photo:

06/25/2010 10:01:16 PM · #59
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That's just doing a straight merge with photomatix and tonemapping, BTW....

OK, I re-worked this much more simply using a merge of the three "original" images only and the default settings for the HDR software, along with basic Curves adjustments and USM only. I also used the same editing steps on the "normal" original only for comparison. Screenshots of my adjustments are linked within the photographer notes ...

New HDR version: Edited single image:
06/25/2010 10:20:24 PM · #60
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That's just doing a straight merge with photomatix and tonemapping, BTW....

OK, I re-worked this much more simply using a merge of the three "original" images only and the default settings for the HDR software, along with basic Curves adjustments and USM only. I also used the same editing steps on the "normal" original only for comparison. Screenshots of my adjustments are linked within the photographer notes ...

New HDR version: Edited single image:


In most respects that's very good, a big improvement, but note the difference between yours and mine on the detail in the white blossoms. You really need to capture that detail, and you ought to be able to...



R.
 06/25/2010 10:56:27 PM · #61
so Ive watched this thread... read every post... and still dont get HDR.... lmao
 06/26/2010 02:34:43 AM · #62
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Here's another example, from the same location actually:

From this to this

R.


This is simply awesome
 06/26/2010 05:15:33 AM · #63
I think I figured the HDR thing out with one photo.
The trick is to have the colour spectrum pretty good and central, right?
I hear people talking about a centralised specturm all the time, but is it true that while you might get a good 'normal' picture without this it's pretty necessary for HDR photography?

Edit: I had a go at HRDifying that photo and got this:
//lh4.ggpht.com/_esYKBP2am44/TCXHL-YHlKI/AAAAAAAAFKU/1oTjUBk5Gco/hdrTest.jpg
I think it's over saturated a little, and maybe a little too dark overly, but it's the first photo I've edited that in anyway resembles a HDR photograph.
Next step take a photo and edit it to that! :)

Message edited by Manic - please keep images under 500px and 30kb, or post links or thumbs instead.
 06/27/2010 01:09:20 PM · #64
Okay...here's my experiment with Photomatix software using two images:

+ =

06/27/2010 05:47:55 PM · #65
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
In most respects that's very good, a big improvement, but note the difference between yours and mine on the detail in the white blossoms. You really need to capture that detail, and you ought to be able to...



R.

Took my latest version and pasted in the upper surface of the blossoms from the "underexposed" original, and touched them up a tiny bit ...
06/27/2010 06:27:06 PM · #66
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
In most respects that's very good, a big improvement, but note the difference between yours and mine on the detail in the white blossoms. You really need to capture that detail, and you ought to be able to...



R.

Took my latest version and pasted in the upper surface of the blossoms from the "underexposed" original, and touched them up a tiny bit ...


Good sir, I do believe that your monitor is quite dark. The image is still largely very, very bright.. Then again, if this is intentional.. Carry on.. :)
 06/27/2010 07:39:32 PM · #67
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Good sir, I do believe that your monitor is quite dark. The image is still largely very, very bright.. Then again, if this is intentional.. Carry on.. :)


Agreed. Way too light for my monitor anyway... Better detail on the blossoms however.

R.
 06/27/2010 07:46:45 PM · #68
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Here's another example of manual HDR blending. I can post the originals if people are interested. Basically there are three exposures for fire, tent, background. I almost used it in the challenge, but Caden couldn't hold quite still enough. It was a 20 second exposure for the portion that exposed us.



I would like to see your originals. Was there a light inside your tent the whole time or a flash?

Message edited by author 2010-06-27 19:47:23.
 06/27/2010 10:21:03 PM · #69
Here you go. Here are the separate images along with a screen shot of the manual blend. There were a few lanterns and headlights in the tent. Usually I try for something a bit more diffuse, but I was just goofing around.



Better attempt at the tent:



Message edited by author 2010-06-27 22:22:42.
 06/27/2010 11:02:14 PM · #70
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Good sir, I do believe that your monitor is quite dark. The image is still largely very, very bright.. Then again, if this is intentional.. Carry on.. :)

Entirely possible, though I think I've always been able to see all the blocks on the gray scale on the voting page, and I think my prints usually match my monitor well enough. I'm on a CRT monitor for editing -- I find the LCD monitors most people have these days are usually too bright ... ;-)

It was a bright, sunny late afternoon, with pretty vibrant greens.
 06/27/2010 11:06:13 PM · #71
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Good sir, I do believe that your monitor is quite dark. The image is still largely very, very bright.. Then again, if this is intentional.. Carry on.. :)

Entirely possible, though I think I've always been able to see all the blocks on the gray scale on the voting page, and I think my prints usually match my monitor well enough. I'm on a CRT monitor for editing -- I find the LCD monitors most people have these days are usually too bright ... ;-)

It was a bright, sunny late afternoon, with pretty vibrant greens.


Not to mention the differences with regard to gamut... I'm sure that doesn't help..
 06/27/2010 11:21:40 PM · #72
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Not to mention the differences with regard to gamut... I'm sure that doesn't help..

If you PM me a mailing address, I can send you a print for truer comparison ... assuming my print really does match my monitor!
 06/27/2010 11:28:39 PM · #73
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Not to mention the differences with regard to gamut... I'm sure that doesn't help..

If you PM me a mailing address, I can send you a print for truer comparison ... assuming my print really does match my monitor!


If you'd like to I can do that.. However, I'm not sure there's much to be gained, I'm already very confident that it looks great on your monitor, and probably in print too! :)

Essentially, I just get a bit of a "too bright" feeling from that image.. You did manage to preserve the details in the closest flower, but everything is pretty poppin-bright...
 06/30/2010 11:23:24 AM · #74
removed

Message edited by author 2010-07-01 03:01:58.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 01:30:00 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: 04/25/2024 01:30:00 PM EDT.