[wtlwdwgn]

Howdy. I've been doing some research in this forum on in camera HDR and although the consensus is it extends the dynamic range I'm not seeing tangible results. The only place I see any difference is in the histogram. It's probably operator error but I did this test and I don't see where I'm ahead using HDR. All are SOOC. Perhaps the dynamic range of the K-1 II is good enough. Comments?

Control image, not HDR.


HDR Auto.


HDR 1.


HDR 2.


HDR 3.

[Pentax Syntax]

That HDR series is a bit strange to me. Usually the three HDR 123 settings give increasingly exaggerated HD-most bordering on the surreal. These look like the changes seen by the shadow and highlight settings for JPEG rendering. Have you checked the bracketing settings for HDR?

[wtlwdwgn]

Yes I think so. I did each setting at +/- 3 EV. The only other thing that was different was the HDR files were 3 times larger. I did check and I do have the D-range setting on Auto. I wonder if that's why the images are so close?

I've also done a bracket test and when merged as an HDR in LR CC there is a noticeable difference with the HDRs showing a lot more DR.

[thegreat26]

What i saw when i was trying the hdr function on my k1 is that if i was using the Digital Camera Utility the hdr changes were visible. After i was importing the shots to lightroom the raw file was flat as always. Maybe lightroom can't read hdr changes properly i don't know.

[wtlwdwgn]

Thanks 26 for your input.

[robgski]

Personally, I like the results of in-camera HDR, it's subtle and effective. I prefer it, and it has saved some shots in difficult conditions. Even after Post processing it rarely looks overdone or obviously HDR.
What are you looking for, extended dynamic range to you can see the details in shadows without blown highlights, or that surreal effect that gives HDR such a bad reputation? If the former, then I'd say the K-1 delivers a nice even exposure. If the latter, then not.

[Adam]

Howdy. I've been doing some research in this forum on in camera HDR and although the consensus is it extends the dynamic range I'm not seeing tangible results. The only place I see any difference is in the histogram. It's probably operator error but I did this test and I don't see where I'm ahead using HDR. All are SOOC. Perhaps the dynamic range of the K-1 II is good enough. Comments?

Control image, not HDR.


HDR Auto.


HDR 1.


HDR 2.


HDR 3.

Take a look at the JPEGs, as they should illustrate the difference more clearly. Not sure if LR fully supports Pentax's HDR DNG's.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[Bob 256]

Actually, those images look almost identical to me. Here's a possible reason.

Consider you have two cards and send DNGs to one and JPEGs to the other. When you take an HDR shot, the resulting DNG has three exposures encoded as one file and is recorded on the DNG card. At the same time, that DNG information is processed by the camera according to the HDR mode you have set (HRD 1, HDR 2....etc), and the single image HDR image goes to the JPEG card as a JPEG. You also see the processed image on the LCD screen.

If you were to drop the DNG card into a software program which doesn't recognize the encoded HDR file, it may just default to one of the three images (which wouldn't be HDR). It would do the same for all of the HDR camera modes (in fact all of the DNGs are identical regardless of the HDR camera mode).

If you look at the JPEG card, you would see the different HDR modes and they would be markedly different from each other. However, if you want to change the HDR processing, you can't since it was done in the camera and you have a finished product.

I use two cards and simultaneously capture DNG and JPEG files for each HDR. Sometimes, I end up using the JPEG as is since it can be a reasonable HDR photo, but most often, I use RAWTherapee to separate the DNG into its three exposures (16 bit tifs) and then drop those into Photomatix which provides a multitude of HDR options for processing, and that spits out the final HDR image.

You're probably trying to view a DNG on software which doesn't know the DNG is HDR and doesn't use the three encoded files properly. You have two choices - use the JPEG file which the camera has processed to HDR or do something like I described to get a true HDR output (the right software should be able to do it without involving Photomatix). Without knowing the capabilities of the software you're using, I can't surmise exactly what's happening but chances are, you aren't seeing the HDR result.

Do as Adam suggested and write a series of JPEGs (using the different HDR modes) to a card and look at them in your software viewer. They should show HDR and be considerably different from one another. For DNGs, you may have to resort to different software or determine how to get your software to recognize the encoded HDR images in a single DNG file.

[thepedant]

When you use the HDR modes and shoot raw, you can either develop them to a JPEG in-camera, or use Digital Camera Utility to split into three raw files and use some other software to merge them. Digital Camera Utility cannot by itself merge the three images (and it seems singularly remiss of Ricoh not to have included that facility in DCU). If you save a JPEG from DCU then it's just giving you the first of the three images. I don't think RawTherapee can do the merge either but it can access and develop separately each one of the three images.

[Medex]

LR does not support RAW/DNG HDR files. Switch file format on the camera to JPEG and you will see the difference after importing files to LR.

[Rondec]

I think you have your answer, but reiterate, if you want to see the difference, you need to shoot the images as jpeg, develop them in camera into TIFF or jpeg files, or open them in DCU. I believe that Raw Therapee can separate the files, but not develop them into a tone mapped image. Basically the RAW file is a container that holds three RAW images. Lightroom is just taking the first of those images and allowing you to develop it.

It is a little bit akin to how Lightroom used to treat pixel shifted images. Now it actually can combine pixel shift images, but it still can't do motion correction on them.

[Pentax Syntax]

Yes I think so. I did each setting at +/- 3 EV. The only other thing that was different was the HDR files were 3 times larger. I did check and I do have the D-range setting on Auto. I wonder if that's why the images are so close?

I've also done a bracket test and when merged as an HDR in LR CC there is a noticeable difference with the HDRs showing a lot more DR.

What happens when you look at the series on the camera screen? The differences should be noticible there. I am really curious about how this resolves!

[wtlwdwgn]

Thanks everyone for your help. I guess it's LR's inability to recognize HDR raw files that caused my confusion. I don't see a lot of difference between a single image and HDR image on the rear screen either. I'll have to go shoot another series in jpegs to see the difference. Or maybe I'll just stick to bracketing.

[Dericali]

Perhaps the dynamic range of the K-1 II is good enough. Comments?

The dynamic range of the Pentax K1 is 14.6 EV. You can play around with raw files in Lightroom to see what is possible.

In-camera HDR is relatively pointless IMO. Much more control in LR or PS

[wtlwdwgn]

Thanks Dericali.