I used Photomatrix for these.... This is straight default settings....

C&C always welcome!











Hope you like 'em!

Thanks,

Ken

[Black Magic]

Nice Shots. They look fairly natural. I really like the perspective, and rays of light of the third shot. But, you do seem to have a good bit of sensor dust. I think your photos could benefit from some cloning.

[kevinschoenmakers]

I really like #1, it has a great feel.... and sensor dust.

[Ash]

I don't mind the effect either.
A little on the oversaturated side, but I realise this can be a side effect of the HDR software.
Not bad at all1

Now that's how HDRi should look. My only minor comment is the lens flair, I'm not sure it works.

[Javaslinger]

Thanks for the comments! Sorry for the dust... it has been taken care of...

As for the lens flare.. I was using a lens hood, but that didn't seem to do the trick. What other ways can I avoid this?

Thanks,

Ken

[mischivo]

Now that's how HDRi should look. My only minor comment is the lens flair, I'm not sure it works.

Ooh, I'm hoping you're flattering the OP!

Although I'm happy that the tonal mapping on these photos isn't manipulated to the extent that the tones are all of the same value, I am disappointed in this HDR. The images, especially the first few, have large sections of blown sky! I notice that the OP has tried to combat this by simply mapping the tones to something below blown, but this has no impact on the utter loss of detail and colour information, it actually makes it look worst.

I'm not certain how many exposures were taken per given image, but I suspect it may be one exposure. If that is the case, this is not HDR. If the OP has taken more than one image, then my suggestion is to make add additional exposures that capture the highlight details of the scene. For sunsets and portions of the sky, this usually involves very high shutter speeds.

You've got the right idea going with your not-over-the-top tonal values and scene contrast, but the lack of highlight details makes this HDR lack that extra punch.

Additionally, I've just noticed that there are many dust specks on your images. Visible dust specs suggest you are using small apertures. I'm not certain why you would do this. The best way to take HDR shots, or anything involving multiple exposures, is to pick an aperture setting, say f5.6 or f8.0 (but these are completely scene dependent), and vary the shutter speed to compensate for the different exposures. Varying the iris will create odd effects involving dust, depth of field, and contrast.

Ooh, I'm hoping you're flattering the OP!

Although I'm happy that the tonal mapping on these photos isn't manipulated to the extent that the tones are all of the same value, I am disappointed in this HDR. The images, especially the first few, have large sections of blown sky! I notice that the OP has tried to combat this by simply mapping the tones to something below blown, but this has no impact on the utter loss of detail and colour information, it actually makes it look worst.

I'm not certain how many exposures were taken per given image, but I suspect it may be one exposure. If that is the case, this is not HDR. If the OP has taken more than one image, then my suggestion is to make add additional exposures that capture the highlight details of the scene. For sunsets and portions of the sky, this usually involves very high shutter speeds.

You've got the right idea going with your not-over-the-top tonal values and scene contrast, but the lack of highlight details makes this HDR lack that extra punch.

Additionally, I've just noticed that there are many dust specks on your images. Visible dust specs suggest you are using small apertures. I'm not certain why you would do this. The best way to take HDR shots, or anything involving multiple exposures, is to pick an aperture setting, say f5.6 or f8.0 (but these are completely scene dependent), and vary the shutter speed to compensate for the different exposures. Varying the iris will create odd effects involving dust, depth of field, and contrast.

Yes the highlights are blown and he has dust but if you'd read his later post you'd have seen that he said he's sorted the dust problem. If your shooting landscapes you want a small-ish aperture.

May I suggest you think and read a bit more before you start criticizing other work and commenting on other post!

[Javaslinger]

Thanks for the continued C&C!

As I mentioned these are my first attempts at HDR. Really, I didn't put to much effor into 'learning' or 'optimizing' the software. That will come with the next round. This round, as I said, is straight defaults.

These are definitely multiple exposures. Some are 3 and some are 5....

In any case I appreciate the criticism mischivo, but I may no attempts to improve these beyone the use of Photomatrix at is defaults... these were my round 1 attempts....

Thanks again everyone!

Ken

[Cosmo]

The amount of HDR is just right.

[mischivo]

Yes the highlights are blown and he has dust but if you'd read his later post you'd have seen that he said he's sorted the dust problem. If your shooting landscapes you want a small-ish aperture.

May I suggest you think and read a bit more before you start criticizing other work and commenting on other post!

I beckon you to re-read what I wrote with a vigilant eye. You seem to be chastising me for a minor mention of dust, whereas the overall paragraph suggested an entire process for multiple-exposure shooting in general. I'm not sure why you're jumping the gun.

You should refrain from making blanket statements such as, "If your shooting landscapes you want a small-ish aperture". Reader's might actually listen to you. "Landscape" is a very general term and may be applied to anything from a telephoto of that distant mountain top to wide-angle of a soccer field. The aperture setting used will vary heavily between different applications and depth of field requirements. Some photographers may choose to use their lens at its "sweet spot". For many primes, this is between f4 and f8. Stopping a lens down much further than that (exactly how much depends on sensor pixel density) will introduce noticeable diffraction effects, which cause loss of acuity. Although some instances require maximum depth of field, which is frequently achieved with wide angle lenses stopped down (or tilt and/or shifting lenses tilted), the extent to which a lens must be stopped down is dependent on the proximity of important subject matter, and the degree to which a photographer chooses to enhance depth of field versus introducing resolution-killing diffraction. Poor rules of thumb, such as the one you've recommended, will do nothing but impose a flawed sense of requirement on new and inexperienced photographers. For the sake of assisting beginners, I would avoid making such grand, sweeping statements.

[Gooshin]

i'm just going to keep posting this in these types of threads until it catches on

HDR = high dynamic range, not hyper danimc range

grass does not have an orange glow to it, and trees do not have a blue tint under a warm summer sunset out in the field.

also a blown highlight in an HDR photo is epic fail, the point of amassing multiple exposures is to capture the highlights and the shadows, surpasing the sensors native dynamic range.

[IowaBoy]

I play around with photomatix and have had some luck with using Aperture to set 3 exposures and then processing them. In any event pictures with great exposure do not benefit much in my opinion. HDR has its best effect on pictures that have information in the dark areas that cannot be brought out by other means. It is easy to get over saturated pictures that are not usually the goal.

Welcome to HDR and remember there are a lot of buttons that all have some effect on the end result and sometimes when things get out of hand it is best to start over with programs defaults. When you get one right you will know it!

[jbcampbell]

The photos are very good...I would like to see the original shots. I do a lot of HDR work with Photomatix and to me these just look very saturated, not really a great deal of dynamic range. But that's hard to say with out seeing the originals. Was each shot bracketed by 1 stop or more?