HDR, the software quest.

riff · 09-11-2011, 11:33 PM

Daacon & Wheatfield; Sorry for the slow replies. Had a wedding to attend, took a few shots, they mostly suck. The MAN was shooting Canon. I did purchase a nice tripod and ball head while in the city.

Today the net has been seriously dodgy.

Wheatfield, the first image has a real shot in the mountains feel to it. (though I expect it wasn't) Regardless, I like it.

mysticcowboy, thanks for your comments. The K-5's built in HDR surprised me, as you say it can be excellent. I hated waiting on it to process though, it breaks my flow.

There is a lot of IMO bad HDR created. I think it's a combination of maybe not great source images and very heavy handed processing, perhaps induced by the less then ideal source images. The masters can push an image a long way before I go eek. For example PF forum member Trig's work sings to me. I enjoy many flavors of neat clean HDR.

For a frame of reference here's a HDR of mine posted in the Sigma 10-20 Lens Club. The sky was that wild.

Regards

dosdan · 09-15-2011, 04:19 AM

Originally posted by mysticcowboy

HDR is a technique for combining multiple images with different exposures.

Not necessarily. The DR of the K-5 means that you may have a issue presenting a wide DR scene in a print or on a screen. So either you have to fiddle with the gamma, crush blacks or highlights, bend the TRC some more, or you use some form of tone mapping similar to what's used in HDR.

So rather than combining 3 shots, each with 10-12 stops DR, taken at

-1.5 EV, 0EV, +1.5, or
-2 EV, 0EV, +2EV or even
-3 EV, 0EV, +3 EV

and then tone-mapping the combination into a realistically output-able DR, you try for a milder (hopefully more realistic) HDR effect with 1 image. The viability of 1-shot HDR with the K-5 HDR probably rests on how deleterious real world lens flare is on a single shot's DR. The advantage of using just 1 shot is no motion ghosting problems.

Dan.

wildman · 09-15-2011, 05:21 AM

I don't know what the official definition of HDR is but what I do want to accomplish is to extend the DR to the end of getting a image with a DR closer to what the human eye sees. No over the top special effects.

I've tried a mess of different software towards this end.

For simple realistic images with a extended DR beyond what any given single exposure can give you, I've found the built in "HDR Pro" extension in Photoshop the best for this purpose. Just make sure to select the "Photorealistic" option in the program. It gives you a nice clean image with nothing extra. I've never had to use more than three bracketed shots. It can merge these shots directly from RAW files.

Maybe not absolutely the best for this purpose but plenty good enough.

Anvh · 09-17-2011, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by wildman

I don't know what the official definition of HDR is but what I do want to accomplish is to extend the DR to the end of getting a image with a DR closer to what the human eye sees. No over the top special effects.

You can create something that has the dynamic range close to the human eye but you've no way of showing it because the monitor or your prints have limited dynamic range as well.

There are special HDR monitors but they do cost a lot.

09-15-2011, 05:21 AM	#18
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	I don't know what the official definition of HDR is but what I do want to accomplish is to extend the DR to the end of getting a image with a DR closer to what the human eye sees. No over the top special effects. I've tried a mess of different software towards this end. For simple realistic images with a extended DR beyond what any given single exposure can give you, I've found the built in "HDR Pro" extension in Photoshop the best for this purpose. Just make sure to select the "Photorealistic" option in the program. It gives you a nice clean image with nothing extra. I've never had to use more than three bracketed shots. It can merge these shots directly from RAW files. Maybe not absolutely the best for this purpose but plenty good enough. Last edited by wildman; 09-15-2011 at 05:51 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which HDR software is best?	GadgetFan	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	18	05-16-2012 11:25 AM
I tried different HDR Software....	Eric Seavey	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	2	08-12-2011 07:02 PM
Help with Picturenaut (HDR software)	AubreyCs	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	5	07-31-2011 01:33 PM
HDR, Megapixels, and Software	PaulfromTexas	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	02-21-2011 08:13 AM
HDR Software - Dynamic-Photo HDR	mithrandir	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	03-03-2009 08:46 PM

09-11-2011, 11:33 PM	#16
riff Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,408 Original Poster	Daacon & Wheatfield; Sorry for the slow replies. Had a wedding to attend, took a few shots, they mostly suck. The MAN was shooting Canon. I did purchase a nice tripod and ball head while in the city. Today the net has been seriously dodgy. Wheatfield, the first image has a real shot in the mountains feel to it. (though I expect it wasn't) Regardless, I like it. mysticcowboy, thanks for your comments. The K-5's built in HDR surprised me, as you say it can be excellent. I hated waiting on it to process though, it breaks my flow. There is a lot of IMO bad HDR created. I think it's a combination of maybe not great source images and very heavy handed processing, perhaps induced by the less then ideal source images. The masters can push an image a long way before I go eek. For example PF forum member Trig's work sings to me. I enjoy many flavors of neat clean HDR. For a frame of reference here's a HDR of mine posted in the Sigma 10-20 Lens Club. The sky was that wild. Regards

09-15-2011, 04:19 AM	#17
dosdan Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,741	Originally posted by mysticcowboy HDR is a technique for combining multiple images with different exposures. Not necessarily. The DR of the K-5 means that you may have a issue presenting a wide DR scene in a print or on a screen. So either you have to fiddle with the gamma, crush blacks or highlights, bend the TRC some more, or you use some form of tone mapping similar to what's used in HDR. So rather than combining 3 shots, each with 10-12 stops DR, taken at -1.5 EV, 0EV, +1.5, or -2 EV, 0EV, +2EV or even -3 EV, 0EV, +3 EV and then tone-mapping the combination into a realistically output-able DR, you try for a milder (hopefully more realistic) HDR effect with 1 image. The viability of 1-shot HDR with the K-5 HDR probably rests on how deleterious real world lens flare is on a single shot's DR. The advantage of using just 1 shot is no motion ghosting problems. Dan.

09-17-2011, 03:03 PM	#19
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by wildman I don't know what the official definition of HDR is but what I do want to accomplish is to extend the DR to the end of getting a image with a DR closer to what the human eye sees. No over the top special effects. You can create something that has the dynamic range close to the human eye but you've no way of showing it because the monitor or your prints have limited dynamic range as well. There are special HDR monitors but they do cost a lot.