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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> How good are you at HDR?
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 68, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 08/20/2010 03:28:02 PM · #26
Fast try

Raw editing : Ufraw and Gimp
HDR: Qtpfsgui
Final cut: Gimp
08/20/2010 04:04:16 PM · #27
A fairly natural rendition



using exposure fusion (see comments attached to image) and light psuedo-HDR tone map. The basic fused image could be HDR'd more strongly if that look is preferred, I've mainly looked at clawing back the highlights into the image.
 08/20/2010 05:46:12 PM · #28
dropbox.com will give you 2 gigs of space free and 100 gigs if you pay.
 08/20/2010 07:58:35 PM · #29
How good am I at HDR? I guess I'm about this good. :)



Selected 3 exposures, under/correct/over
photoshopped into 4, two over exposed to expose different details in the shadows
Photomatix with Details enhancer
back into PS
Split into 3 sections, (water, foliage, rocks&falls)
Adjust to taste (Brightness/contrast, hue/sat, color balance)
Nik RAW Presharpener on foliage and rocks/falls
Topaz Denoise 5 on water
Nik RAW Output sharpener on water for structure
Nik RAW Output sharpener on Rocks/Falls for sharp/structure
Adv. Sharpening techniques (resize/sharpen stuff/3200/1600/800px--gotta love the 5DII)

Message edited by author 2010-08-20 20:12:25.
 08/20/2010 09:27:03 PM · #30
My quick take on the subject:

08/20/2010 10:45:05 PM · #31


6 combined in Oloneo Just started playing with the beta yesterday, impressed so far.
Nik Pro Contrast
Curves
convert to jpg
save

Edit: Can't view the large image but it looks much better than this one

Message edited by author 2010-08-20 22:46:42.
 08/20/2010 11:21:24 PM · #32
Do your own damn processing, lazy bastard. /*shaking fist*/



This scene is very challenging, what with the blown highlights and too much foliage. Ah, well...
 08/20/2010 11:27:46 PM · #33

This is a beautiful learning experience - so many interpretations as to what can be done with the same base pictures. I hope you don't mind that I tried as well - I haven't gotten around to exposure bracketing yet...
 08/20/2010 11:35:03 PM · #34
Originally posted by NeVeRyn:

This is a beautiful learning experience - so many interpretations as to what can be done with the same base pictures. I hope you don't mind that I tried as well - I haven't gotten around to exposure bracketing yet...


this is really nice. it has an interesting glow to the waterfalls.
 08/20/2010 11:38:11 PM · #35
Originally posted by Bear_Music:


PhotomatixPro on all 6 originals, Topaz Detail, and a little Topaz Simplify for web viewing. You wouldn't want the simplify for printing, but it cleans up details for web viewing nicely IMO.

Be sure to click on "View Full Sized Image", this is a 5.8 megabyte file that DPC has made an 800-pixel preview of, and the preview looks fuzzy.

I can't open the 5DII RAWs in CS3, so I just went blind and merged all 6 in Photomatix. I have no idea if I'd be better off with fewer originals until I get around to converting the CR2's to NEF's, which I can do but takes time.

R.


A true, "I don't know why" question, but why is there no detail in the whites at the bottom of the fall? I'd expect an HDR from 6 images would have that detail in it.
 08/20/2010 11:42:04 PM · #36
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
A true, "I don't know why" question, but why is there no detail in the whites at the bottom of the fall? I'd expect an HDR from 6 images would have that detail in it.

Even the darkest exposure is blown on that bit of the water. There are no details to recover.
 08/20/2010 11:44:55 PM · #37
Originally posted by david_c:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
A true, "I don't know why" question, but why is there no detail in the whites at the bottom of the fall? I'd expect an HDR from 6 images would have that detail in it.

Even the darkest exposure is blown on that bit of the water. There are no details to recover.


Ahhhh, got ya.... so blame the Sneezing Doc? :-)
 08/20/2010 11:59:08 PM · #38
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by david_c:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
A true, "I don't know why" question, but why is there no detail in the whites at the bottom of the fall? I'd expect an HDR from 6 images would have that detail in it.

Even the darkest exposure is blown on that bit of the water. There are no details to recover.


Ahhhh, got ya.... so blame the Sneezing Doc? :-)


Or his lack of a true spot meter, yeah.

R.
 08/21/2010 12:57:36 AM · #39
I've started to allow parts of streaming water to blow because it looks more natural to the eye. However, in this case, I'm a bit surprised that -3 still had some blowing out.
 08/21/2010 01:13:16 AM · #40
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
However, in this case, I'm a bit surprised that -3 still had some blowing out.


That is a bit surprising.
08/21/2010 01:20:51 AM · #41
Well, here is my take using manual blending. I wound up using 5 of the exposures (although one seemed to have a bit of shake blur to it and I didn't use much of it). I'll have to post everybody's versions in a single post so people can compare for their enjoyment.

08/21/2010 04:25:59 AM · #42
N/T

Message edited by author 2010-08-22 12:53:32.
 08/22/2010 08:32:55 AM · #43
I like david_c's the best. His entry is the most natural lookin and almost feels like it has more depth than the other pictures. The rest of them are just over done in my opinion. Most of the pictures seem to end up with fluorescent greens or some weird color shift in the water. Some entries almost look like they were oversharpened (I've seen this a lot with HDR images).

Message edited by author 2010-08-22 08:38:05.
 08/22/2010 09:05:45 AM · #44
Originally posted by coryboehne:
How good am I at HDR? I guess I'm about this good. :)



To me, this one is the winner by a wide margin. Very impressive (and surprising) processing.
 08/22/2010 09:39:22 AM · #45


Loaded all 6 into LR, recovery to 100 on all then processed through Photomatix. Then adjusted the darks and applied two gradients, one for the trees and one for the water and rocks.



Message edited by author 2010-08-22 10:10:41.
 08/22/2010 01:01:41 PM · #46
Originally posted by yakatme:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
How good am I at HDR? I guess I'm about this good. :)



To me, this one is the winner by a wide margin. Very impressive (and surprising) processing.


Awww, thanks! (blushes)... :)
 08/22/2010 01:25:08 PM · #47
Originally posted by yakatme:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
How good am I at HDR? I guess I'm about this good. :)



To me, this one is the winner by a wide margin. Very impressive (and surprising) processing.


Agreed!
 08/22/2010 01:27:54 PM · #48
I'll take a stab at this as well once I'm done fabricating some goofy rusty shot I've got a free moment. Thanks for the idea, Dr. I've always used photomatix, but I think I'm done with it. It's just too unrealistic. I've been trying to work from one capture lately, with exposure adjustments. I don't want dreamy, I just want a nice exposure.
 08/22/2010 01:43:41 PM · #49
.. and here's a version with only one of the exposures tonemapped...


08/22/2010 02:13:49 PM · #50
D'OH!!

Just downloaded the files.

I have CS2....I do not like DPP as much as ACR.....at least I can get to them.

...but I will say that DPP curve adjustment rocks compared to ACR (CS2) just for the histogram overlay. :)

Message edited by author 2010-08-22 14:16:46.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 05:26:46 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: 04/19/2024 05:26:46 PM EDT.