D80 questions.

It's really worth a playing with Photomatix HDR (it's free any way) .
I set my D80 to continous shooting mode, set camera brketing to +2
nd -2,camera to spotmeter and take a reading from the midtone,then fire
away in RAW. For most lanscapes and builings it works fine, but if the
sobject is really high contrast you'll need to extend the range from +4
through to -4.Below is the link to their site.
http://www.hdrsoft.com/

Bruce

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:40:47 +0100, "Bruce"
wrote:

It's really worth a playing with Photomatix HDR (it's free any way) .
I set my D80 to continous shooting mode, set camera brketing to +2
nd -2,camera to spotmeter and take a reading from the midtone,then fire
away in RAW. For most lanscapes and builings it works fine, but if the
sobject is really high contrast you'll need to extend the range from +4
through to -4.Below is the link to their site.
http://www.hdrsoft.com/

Bruce

so, how does this work if you have people walking around in the
viewfinder. Do they appear in 3 or 4 different positions in the final
composite?

Probaly.I have used mainly for still subjects,it does work well on available
light portraits.

Bruce

"Lawrence Glickman" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:40:47 +0100, "Bruce"
wrote:

It's really worth a playing with Photomatix HDR (it's free any way) .
I set my D80 to continous shooting mode, set camera brketing to +2
nd -2,camera to spotmeter and take a reading from the midtone,then fire
away in RAW. For most lanscapes and builings it works fine, but if the
sobject is really high contrast you'll need to extend the range from +4
through to -4.Below is the link to their site.
http://www.hdrsoft.com/

Bruce

so, how does this work if you have people walking around in the
viewfinder. Do they appear in 3 or 4 different positions in the final
composite?

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:13:17 +0100, "Bruce"
wrote:

Probaly.I have used mainly for still subjects,it does work well on available
light portraits.

I think for still life situations, fine. I think for other tough
situations, I use software to pull details out of shadow areas. One
fine program that the US Government uses to do this is Extensis.

For portraits, Extensis might put too much sharpening into the image
though, so for that I would just go after the low end of the S curve,
leaving the mid-tones and highlights alone, using _one_ exposure.

I know there are tough situations that require image enhancement. I
do it all the time myself. I was just questioning the idea of using
your recommended software on a moving subject. Even at 3
frames/second, you're going to have blur, for example something that
includes moving traffic like people and automobiles.

So I usually work off just 1 frame. It's tricky but if your DSLR
sensor can handle the lattitude, you can _sometimes_ (but not always)
get away with pulling the curve.

Try Extensis and see if that can give you the edge. Maybe some here
don't already know about it. IIRC, it uses the Retinex engine. So
google Retinex.

Lg

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Rudy Benner wrote:
|
| "Lawrence Glickman" wrote in message
| news | On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:13:17 +0100, "Bruce"
| wrote:
|
| Probaly.I have used mainly for still subjects,it does work well on
| available
| light portraits.
|
| I think for still life situations, fine. I think for other tough
| situations, I use software to pull details out of shadow areas. One
| fine program that the US Government uses to do this is Extensis.
|
| For portraits, Extensis might put too much sharpening into the image
| though, so for that I would just go after the low end of the S curve,
| leaving the mid-tones and highlights alone, using _one_ exposure.
|
| I know there are tough situations that require image enhancement. I
| do it all the time myself. I was just questioning the idea of using
| your recommended software on a moving subject. Even at 3
| frames/second, you're going to have blur, for example something that
| includes moving traffic like people and automobiles.
|
| So I usually work off just 1 frame. It's tricky but if your DSLR
| sensor can handle the lattitude, you can _sometimes_ (but not always)
| get away with pulling the curve.
|
| Try Extensis and see if that can give you the edge. Maybe some here
| don't already know about it. IIRC, it uses the Retinex engine. So
| google Retinex.
|
| Lg
|
|
| Did a Google for Extensis and did not find anything resembling what you
| describe.
Extensis is out of business now. The place who bought them out is:
http://www.ononesoftware.com/products.php


- --

from Douglas,
If my PGP key is missing, the
post is a forgery. Ignore it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFIB8zUhuxzk5D6V14RAhTvAJ0ZpvzkBr/RDcsMyovCAJg6VoiKtwCfcRxp
S4l45k85TTTMEY+2uBLk4Z8=
=U54T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In article , Alienjones
wrote:

Extensis is out of business now.

they are very much still in business.

The place who bought them out is:
http://www.ononesoftware.com/products.php

they bought some of their assets. not all.

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:19:00 +1000, Alienjones
wrote:

| Try Extensis and see if that can give you the edge. Maybe some here
| don't already know about it. IIRC, it uses the Retinex engine. So
| google Retinex.
|
| Lg
|
|
| Did a Google for Extensis and did not find anything resembling what you
| describe.
Extensis is out of business now. The place who bought them out is:
http://www.ononesoftware.com/products.php

Okay, google "Retinex"

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:19:00 +1000, Alienjones
wrote:


http://docs.gimp.org/en/plug-in-retinex.html

In article , Lawrence
Glickman wrote:

http://docs.gimp.org/en/plug-in-retinex.html

how is this any better than fill light and shadow/highlight tool that's
already built into photoshop?

plus, the example doesn't look particularly good.

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:34:17 -0700, nospam
wrote:

In article , Lawrence
Glickman wrote:

http://docs.gimp.org/en/plug-in-retinex.html

how is this any better than fill light and shadow/highlight tool that's
already built into photoshop?

plus, the example doesn't look particularly good.

Quite frankly, I think that the fill light in a bunch of different
software programs is better than Retinex alone, but Extensis has put
together something called Intellihance, which is an algorithm used by
Photoshop that digs out the detail and sharpens it.

Take a photo in a fog, Intellihance cuts through it. NASA uses this
exact algorithm for enhancing their incoming graphics from space
satellites. If it is good enough for NASA, it is good enough for me.

That said, there are many many alternatives in Photoshop, but
Intellihance *does it* in one click, and move the Dynamic Slider for
the desired result.

As a matter of fact, I only use Photoshop for those images that are
beyond the capabilities of my ordinary everyday software. If I import
an image into Photoshop, that means something is desparately wrong
with it to begin with. I think of Photoshop as a Trauma Center for
photos, where they come out either dead, or alive.

Lg