K5 DNG versus HDR

Beau · 11-16-2010, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by cem.kumuk

With pleasure... I'll upload original 3 frames converted from RAW to JPEG. The HDR is made of combination of these 3 frames in Photomatix pro3.

cem.kumuk, could you provide us with the RAW file of the 0 shot, and maybe the -2 shot? I would like to try and see if the single file with a different tone-mapping can come close to the (tonemapped) HDR file. Thanks!

Smeggypants · 11-16-2010, 05:29 PM

I much prefer this shot to the HDR version.

...and I'm no purist, I love a tastefully done bit of PP.

falconeye · 11-16-2010, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by cem.kumuk

In built HDR at K-5 is not a real HDR application. I can call it pseudo HDR only. Because a real HDR must be at least made of 3 or 5 frames with ev differences about 1,5 or 2 in between each. Than dedicated softwares like Photomatix combine these frames to built a real HDR photo.

cem, nice photo indeed

However, I cannot agree on what you write. I see where you are coming from but I think you confuse two different things here.

The first is stacking. Multiple photos are aligned and stacked into a single one with a dynamic range which is 4EV or 8EV larger than any of the original ones, when using 3 or 5 photos 2EV apart each. Photomatix allows to save the result from stacking as a single hdr file. Actually, the demo version allows you to do so without restriction and it stamps no demo label into images if you are doing so. The result is a single hdr file you can further process in other applications.

The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV. Photomatix allows to load any hdr file to allow tone mapping. Most people are not aware of the two steps because they don't save in between.

A raw file from the K-5 can be considered a true hdr file because it well exceeds the normal DR we used to see from digital cameras. It should compare well with 3 image bracketed hdrs from other cameras. You can convert it to 32 Bit in PS and save as a true hdr file to be opened by, e.g., Photomatix.

Moreover, the built-in hdr application in the K-5 does a 3 image bracket with 3EV steps IIRC, aligns, stacks and applies one out of a choice of four tone mappings. Of course, Photomatix or other packages offer more control.

The last raw for the city gate (at -2EV) is more than sufficient alone to recreate the full HDR version shown as the first image. No need for the other two shots with a K-5. At least not at ISO 80. Just save as 32 Bit file in Ps (all settings and black level 0 upon ACR import!) and open in Photomatix.

Smeggypants · 11-16-2010, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV.

Most images I've seen, which are called HDR, have always seemed to have a very low dynamic range because of over compression.

falconeye · 11-16-2010, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by Smeggypants

Most images I've seen, which are called HDR, have always seemed to have a very low dynamic range because of over compression.

I agree. Low contrast I mean. Good HDR art doesn't look like HDR, it just looks like a moment with some magic in the illumination. It's very rarely seen though...

For instance, I like the 1st image of the OP and the 2nd image du Beau.

Smeggypants · 11-16-2010, 06:07 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

I agree. Low contrast I mean. Good HDR art doesn't look like HDR, it just looks like a moment with some magic in the illumination. It's very rarely seen though...

Indeed.. Most of what I see looks like an Acid Trip. Or those tacky prints you see on sale in a supermarket or mall

cem.kumuk · 11-17-2010, 01:03 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

cem, nice photo indeed

However, I cannot agree on what you write. I see where you are coming from but I think you confuse two different things here.

The first is stacking. Multiple photos are aligned and stacked into a single one with a dynamic range which is 4EV or 8EV larger than any of the original ones, when using 3 or 5 photos 2EV apart each. Photomatix allows to save the result from stacking as a single hdr file. Actually, the demo version allows you to do so without restriction and it stamps no demo label into images if you are doing so. The result is a single hdr file you can further process in other applications.

The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV. Photomatix allows to load any hdr file to allow tone mapping. Most people are not aware of the two steps because they don't save in between.

A raw file from the K-5 can be considered a true hdr file because it well exceeds the normal DR we used to see from digital cameras. It should compare well with 3 image bracketed hdrs from other cameras. You can convert it to 32 Bit in PS and save as a true hdr file to be opened by, e.g., Photomatix.

Moreover, the built-in hdr application in the K-5 does a 3 image bracket with 3EV steps IIRC, aligns, stacks and applies one out of a choice of four tone mappings. Of course, Photomatix or other packages offer more control.

The last raw for the city gate (at -2EV) is more than sufficient alone to recreate the full HDR version shown as the first image. No need for the other two shots with a K-5. At least not at ISO 80. Just save as 32 Bit file in Ps (all settings and black level 0 upon ACR import!) and open in Photomatix.

Thanks a lot for detailed explanation Falk. I can't find anything to disagree in all what you're saying. All what you say can be done even on one frame as well. That's true... If calling one frame HDR as Pseudo HDR, then it means I'm wrong.

Sincerely...

Beau · 11-17-2010, 01:21 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

cem, nice photo indeed

A raw file from the K-5 can be considered a true hdr file because it well exceeds the normal DR we used to see from digital cameras. It should compare well with 3 image bracketed hdrs from other cameras. You can convert it to 32 Bit in PS and save as a true hdr file to be opened by, e.g., Photomatix.

No need to convert it to some other format if using Photomatix, it can open DNG files.

falconeye · 11-17-2010, 04:01 AM

Originally posted by Beau

No need to convert it to some other format if using Photomatix, it can open DNG files.

I know.
But for some reason, Photomatix renders differently if starting from a single raw file. Don't know why. I guess, Photomatix maintains an internal record of input DR which is based on EV steps rather than measured DR. At least, that was the state of things the last time I checked. I don't use Photomatix myself. It never behaved as predictable as I would have liked.

dexmus · 11-17-2010, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

The first is stacking.

The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV. Photomatix allows to load any hdr file to allow tone mapping. Most people are not aware of the two steps because they don't save in between.

Falk, thanks for the information. I was one of those people. Many times the stacked image looked better to me than the tone mapped image but I never bothered to save the stacked image.

cheers

Abhi

PiotrKrochmal · 11-17-2010, 01:52 PM

I do more

I save all DNG, HDR, TIFF (if for printing) and then JPG

. Today HDD space is not an issue. But in few years merging and processing algorithm will develop and I want to have a opportunity to develop those images in better way.

Parallax · 11-17-2010, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by RayGunn

........................
2. In the second post, Parallax writes, “Quite a difference. The second one is awesome.” Parallax, would you kindly educate me why the second photo is “awesome”? Since I am not trying to start a war about whose view is correct, I would appreciate your answer via PM..............

I would rather post it here. One of the commonly accepted definitions of art is that it is something that stirs or generates an emotional response in the viewer. That's exactly what the second one did for me. You said it yourself: "second photo is a town that looks gray and foreboding". That was the felling I had. The first photo was, well, a photo. A good one, but none the less, a photo. The second one I had a response to.

Quote:

Since I am not trying to start a war about whose view is correct

From reading your whole post, with particular attention to the way it is worded, I am not completely convinced of that, but I'll keep an open mind.

Parallax · 11-17-2010, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

RayGunn,

thanks for the artistic or connoisseur touch you bring to the discussion. Almost reminds me of whine or high end audio critics

Originally posted by falconeye

RayGunn, you must misread my post. I meant it in a very positive way.

I agree, Parallax may have wanted to criticize you, but I certainly didn't and actually wanted to express that I liked your post.

Interesting, how miserably I failed

Falk, I think this may clear up the confusion:

Wine

Whine

And, no, it was not my intent to be critical of him any more than it was his intent to start a war as to who was correct.

11-16-2010, 05:50 PM	#33
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by cem.kumuk In built HDR at K-5 is not a real HDR application. I can call it pseudo HDR only. Because a real HDR must be at least made of 3 or 5 frames with ev differences about 1,5 or 2 in between each. Than dedicated softwares like Photomatix combine these frames to built a real HDR photo. cem, nice photo indeed However, I cannot agree on what you write. I see where you are coming from but I think you confuse two different things here. The first is stacking. Multiple photos are aligned and stacked into a single one with a dynamic range which is 4EV or 8EV larger than any of the original ones, when using 3 or 5 photos 2EV apart each. Photomatix allows to save the result from stacking as a single hdr file. Actually, the demo version allows you to do so without restriction and it stamps no demo label into images if you are doing so. The result is a single hdr file you can further process in other applications. The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV. Photomatix allows to load any hdr file to allow tone mapping. Most people are not aware of the two steps because they don't save in between. A raw file from the K-5 can be considered a true hdr file because it well exceeds the normal DR we used to see from digital cameras. It should compare well with 3 image bracketed hdrs from other cameras. You can convert it to 32 Bit in PS and save as a true hdr file to be opened by, e.g., Photomatix. Moreover, the built-in hdr application in the K-5 does a 3 image bracket with 3EV steps IIRC, aligns, stacks and applies one out of a choice of four tone mappings. Of course, Photomatix or other packages offer more control. The last raw for the city gate (at -2EV) is more than sufficient alone to recreate the full HDR version shown as the first image. No need for the other two shots with a K-5. At least not at ISO 80. Just save as 32 Bit file in Ps (all settings and black level 0 upon ACR import!) and open in Photomatix. Last edited by falconeye; 11-16-2010 at 05:58 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1.4x TC + 55-300 versus 1.7x TC + 55-300 versus 55-300mm + cropping.	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	09-05-2009 02:41 PM
HDR Software - Dynamic-Photo HDR	mithrandir	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	03-03-2009 08:46 PM
Batch converting camera dng to acr dng using acr	Maynerd	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	6	01-17-2009 02:22 PM
RAW files? PEF versus DNG?	rdrum76	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	1	11-03-2008 11:59 AM
DNG in-camera vs DNG from Lightroom?	rfortson	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	9	11-02-2008 11:06 PM

11-16-2010, 04:28 PM	#31
Beau Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Leuven, Belgium Posts: 37	Originally posted by cem.kumuk With pleasure... I'll upload original 3 frames converted from RAW to JPEG. The HDR is made of combination of these 3 frames in Photomatix pro3. cem.kumuk, could you provide us with the RAW file of the 0 shot, and maybe the -2 shot? I would like to try and see if the single file with a different tone-mapping can come close to the (tonemapped) HDR file. Thanks!

11-16-2010, 05:29 PM	#32
Smeggypants Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 1,536	I much prefer this shot to the HDR version. ...and I'm no purist, I love a tastefully done bit of PP.

11-16-2010, 05:56 PM	#34
Smeggypants Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 1,536	Originally posted by falconeye The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV. Most images I've seen, which are called HDR, have always seemed to have a very low dynamic range because of over compression.

11-16-2010, 06:03 PM	#35
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Smeggypants Most images I've seen, which are called HDR, have always seemed to have a very low dynamic range because of over compression. I agree. Low contrast I mean. Good HDR art doesn't look like HDR, it just looks like a moment with some magic in the illumination. It's very rarely seen though... For instance, I like the 1st image of the OP and the 2nd image du Beau.

11-16-2010, 06:07 PM	#36
Smeggypants Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 1,536	Originally posted by falconeye I agree. Low contrast I mean. Good HDR art doesn't look like HDR, it just looks like a moment with some magic in the illumination. It's very rarely seen though... Indeed.. Most of what I see looks like an Acid Trip. Or those tacky prints you see on sale in a supermarket or mall

11-17-2010, 01:03 AM	#37
cem.kumuk Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Istanbul Photos: Gallery Posts: 241	Originally posted by falconeye cem, nice photo indeed However, I cannot agree on what you write. I see where you are coming from but I think you confuse two different things here. The first is stacking. Multiple photos are aligned and stacked into a single one with a dynamic range which is 4EV or 8EV larger than any of the original ones, when using 3 or 5 photos 2EV apart each. Photomatix allows to save the result from stacking as a single hdr file. Actually, the demo version allows you to do so without restriction and it stamps no demo label into images if you are doing so. The result is a single hdr file you can further process in other applications. The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV. Photomatix allows to load any hdr file to allow tone mapping. Most people are not aware of the two steps because they don't save in between. A raw file from the K-5 can be considered a true hdr file because it well exceeds the normal DR we used to see from digital cameras. It should compare well with 3 image bracketed hdrs from other cameras. You can convert it to 32 Bit in PS and save as a true hdr file to be opened by, e.g., Photomatix. Moreover, the built-in hdr application in the K-5 does a 3 image bracket with 3EV steps IIRC, aligns, stacks and applies one out of a choice of four tone mappings. Of course, Photomatix or other packages offer more control. The last raw for the city gate (at -2EV) is more than sufficient alone to recreate the full HDR version shown as the first image. No need for the other two shots with a K-5. At least not at ISO 80. Just save as 32 Bit file in Ps (all settings and black level 0 upon ACR import!) and open in Photomatix. Thanks a lot for detailed explanation Falk. I can't find anything to disagree in all what you're saying. All what you say can be done even on one frame as well. That's true... If calling one frame HDR as Pseudo HDR, then it means I'm wrong. Sincerely...

11-17-2010, 01:21 AM	#38
Beau Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Leuven, Belgium Posts: 37	Originally posted by falconeye cem, nice photo indeed A raw file from the K-5 can be considered a true hdr file because it well exceeds the normal DR we used to see from digital cameras. It should compare well with 3 image bracketed hdrs from other cameras. You can convert it to 32 Bit in PS and save as a true hdr file to be opened by, e.g., Photomatix. No need to convert it to some other format if using Photomatix, it can open DNG files.

11-17-2010, 04:01 AM	#39
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Beau No need to convert it to some other format if using Photomatix, it can open DNG files. I know. But for some reason, Photomatix renders differently if starting from a single raw file. Don't know why. I guess, Photomatix maintains an internal record of input DR which is based on EV steps rather than measured DR. At least, that was the state of things the last time I checked. I don't use Photomatix myself. It never behaved as predictable as I would have liked.

11-17-2010, 09:34 AM	#40
dexmus Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: United States Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 392	Originally posted by falconeye The first is stacking. The second is tone mapping. Tone mapping compresses the high DR into 8EV. Photomatix allows to load any hdr file to allow tone mapping. Most people are not aware of the two steps because they don't save in between. Falk, thanks for the information. I was one of those people. Many times the stacked image looked better to me than the tone mapped image but I never bothered to save the stacked image. cheers Abhi

11-17-2010, 01:52 PM	#41
PiotrKrochmal Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Poland -> Kraków Posts: 199 Original Poster	I do more I save all DNG, HDR, TIFF (if for printing) and then JPG . Today HDD space is not an issue. But in few years merging and processing algorithm will develop and I want to have a opportunity to develop those images in better way.

11-17-2010, 04:03 PM	#42
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by RayGunn ........................ 2. In the second post, Parallax writes, “Quite a difference. The second one is awesome.” Parallax, would you kindly educate me why the second photo is “awesome”? Since I am not trying to start a war about whose view is correct, I would appreciate your answer via PM.............. I would rather post it here. One of the commonly accepted definitions of art is that it is something that stirs or generates an emotional response in the viewer. That's exactly what the second one did for me. You said it yourself: "second photo is a town that looks gray and foreboding". That was the felling I had. The first photo was, well, a photo. A good one, but none the less, a photo. The second one I had a response to. Quote: Since I am not trying to start a war about whose view is correct From reading your whole post, with particular attention to the way it is worded, I am not completely convinced of that, but I'll keep an open mind.

11-17-2010, 07:58 PM	#43
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by falconeye RayGunn, thanks for the artistic or connoisseur touch you bring to the discussion. Almost reminds me of whine or high end audio critics Originally posted by falconeye RayGunn, you must misread my post. I meant it in a very positive way. I agree, Parallax may have wanted to criticize you, but I certainly didn't and actually wanted to express that I liked your post. Interesting, how miserably I failed Falk, I think this may clear up the confusion: Wine Whine And, no, it was not my intent to be critical of him any more than it was his intent to start a war as to who was correct.