Photomatix & HDR

On 28-06-09 12:20, Savageduck wrote:


http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...emapped-2w.jpg

Has a 1960's postcard look to it. The whites in the clouds here are
often flat burned out.

Just shows that scenic photos should be shot in the morning or late
afternoon, not mid-day. (I know that photography was not your primary
reason for the trip).

On 2009-06-28 09:11:52 -0700, John McWilliams said:

Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck said:

I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
reasonable results.

Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg

Any suggestions?

Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.

I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...nemapped-w.jpg


Both represent good work. I find neither quite right, but it may well
be because I know in advance it's HDR, and so I am subconsciously
looking for reasons it looks at odds with other photos of similar
content.

How dark was the mountain face in the 'normal' exposure?

Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
exposures resized only, no PP:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:05:45 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck said:

I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
reasonable results.

Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg

Any suggestions?

Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.

I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...nemapped-w.jpg

Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one minute
of editing by using curves? Are you trying to tell me that the dynamic
range of your camera's sensor is even less than that in all my P&S cameras?
Seems to be the case if you need HDR for a simple tourist's snapshot like
this one. You even have the sun to your back so the area of sky in your FOV
is already dark enough to be adequately captured by any camera on earth.

Still a boring composition, there's nothing you can ever do about that. And
it's still crooked. How much more "beginner" can you possibly get. At least
you're learning how to use simple tools like white-balance and not
oversaturate your images so much that it burns out everyone's cones in
their eyes. Again, simple beginner's mistakes unrelated to any HDR work.
Learn the basics of editing and composition before you try something more
complex like HDR. This is like watching someone trying to drive a Harley
with training-wheels on it and they keep falling over every 2 ft. It'd be
funny if it wasn't so pathetically sad.

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
about it now. wrote:

Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one minute
of editing by using curves?

I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing. It seems
to me that it involves taking a good photograph and making something
harsh and unappealing of it.

That said, I completely understand Savageduck's interest. Part of the
fun of photography is trying new techniques and pushing the envelope.
The process can be an enjoyable learning experience even if the
results are not something better than the original.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2009062809054597157-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck
said:

I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
reasonable results.

Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg

Any suggestions?

Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.

I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...nemapped-w.jpg



I would like somewhere in between.
The second try looks color balanced to me, but under saturated with too
little contrast on the mountain and the clouds just over the mountain look
washed out to me.

If you used layers, try some selective masking.

--
Peter

On 2009-06-28 09:26:43 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 28-06-09 12:20, Savageduck wrote:


http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...emapped-2w.jpg

Has a 1960's postcard look to it. The whites in the clouds here are
often flat burned out.

Just shows that scenic photos should be shot in the morning or late
afternoon, not mid-day. (I know that photography was not your primary
reason for the trip).

Yup. Timing, timing, timing.

As far as photography not being the primary reason for the trip goes
you are probably more right than wrong. It was a part of the trip.
I was last in Yosemite over 10 years ago. My wife had been ill and that
precluded any lengthy road trips over the last 10 or so years, we had
other travels, but it was limited to some cruises and some trips back
East.
She died 18 months ago and I retired at the end of February, so it was
time for me to start revisiting some of those places.

Zion NP, Kings Canyon-Sequoia NP, Glacier NP, Yellowstone NP, Lake
Louise, more Alaska & more BC next.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:02:45 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
about it now. wrote:

Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one
minute of editing by using curves?

I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing.

How about these?

http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_2840.jpg
http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_3356.jpg

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com

Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-06-28 09:11:52 -0700, John McWilliams said:

Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck
said:

I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
reasonable results.

Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite
road trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg

Any suggestions?

Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.

I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...nemapped-w.jpg


Both represent good work. I find neither quite right, but it may well
be because I know in advance it's HDR, and so I am subconsciously
looking for reasons it looks at odds with other photos of similar
content.

How dark was the mountain face in the 'normal' exposure?

Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
exposures resized only, no PP:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg

I tried overlaying those in PS and used a soft-edged 200-pixel eraser
for a manual graduated neutral density effect and it was pretty easy for
this particular shot. The dark sky frame was only used for a slight
translucent overlay on the clouds, the foreground looks fine in the
overexposed shot.

Then I overlaid your new tonemapped version & tried luminosity & color
mode... I prefer the manual version. It took some fiddling to get them
to align, set mode to difference & free transform using arrow keys to
nudge & a little rotating too.
Here's the layered photoshop file: http://edgehill.net/1/temp/1119w.psd
-hdr on the top layer, turned off

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

On 2009-06-28 10:16:14 -0700, Robert Spanjaard said:

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:02:45 -0400, tony cooper wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
about it now. wrote:

Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one
minute of editing by using curves?

I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing.

How about these?

http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_2840.jpg
http://www.arumes.com/photo/fullsize/CRW_3356.jpg

Very nice.

As I said, I am just starting out on the climb up this learning curve,
and I will probably find more suitable subjects for HDR in the future.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2009-06-28 10:18:57 -0700, Paul Furman said:

Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-06-28 09:11:52 -0700, John McWilliams said:

Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-06-27 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck said:

I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
reasonable results.

Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg

Any suggestions?

Thanks to all who have commented, I have taken the suggestions to heart.

I have revisited the problem and have made tweeks in Photomatix
tonemapping and CS4 to come up with this:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...nemapped-w.jpg


Both represent good work. I find neither quite right, but it may well
be because I know in advance it's HDR, and so I am subconsciously
looking for reasons it looks at odds with other photos of similar
content.

How dark was the mountain face in the 'normal' exposure?

Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
exposures resized only, no PP:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg

I tried overlaying those in PS and used a soft-edged 200-pixel eraser
for a manual graduated neutral density effect and it was pretty easy
for this particular shot. The dark sky frame was only used for a slight
translucent overlay on the clouds, the foreground looks fine in the
overexposed shot.

Then I overlaid your new tonemapped version & tried luminosity & color
mode... I prefer the manual version. It took some fiddling to get them
to align, set mode to difference & free transform using arrow keys to
nudge & a little rotating too.
Here's the layered photoshop file: http://edgehill.net/1/temp/1119w.psd
-hdr on the top layer, turned off

Thanks for the effort.

Not bad at all.

As I was saying this is all an exercise in solving problem exposures at
the wrong time of day using HDR (when a ND Grad might have been better)
and I (and I hope some others) can only learn from it.

Who cares about the critics if they can't add something constructive
and useful to the debate.

--
Regards,

Savageduck