DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> HDR IV
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 22 of 22, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/14/2011 02:13:48 AM · #1
I



II



III

11/14/2011 08:26:16 AM · #2
Meh. Dunno if I'll enter this one.
11/14/2011 09:09:29 AM · #3
I'll enter if I come up with a good subject for it. Time to go over my mental inventory of things I want to photograph but haven't done them yet.
11/14/2011 09:13:31 AM · #4
ehm...
11/14/2011 09:16:04 AM · #5
Originally posted by FocusPoint:

ehm...

I have no imagination. I'm an imitative hack.
11/14/2011 09:52:46 AM · #6
Meh, I'm not a fan of hdr generally :<. Maybe I could do something in black and white I'd be happy with - or perhaps that'd just get killed from vote 1 for not having at least 2000 vomit-inducing colours.
11/14/2011 10:19:45 AM · #7
Originally posted by HawkinsT:

Meh, I'm not a fan of hdr generally :<. Maybe I could do something in black and white I'd be happy with - or perhaps that'd just get killed from vote 1 for not having at least 2000 vomit-inducing colours.


It's a quandary for sure. "True" HDRI doesn't broadcast its existence; you have to look carefully for signs that it was used. A lot of what people think is "HDR", in DPC and (I presume) elsewhere, is actually just the heavy application of a tone-mapping utility to a single exposure, with liberal doses of fill light, local area contrast, and saturation. In the first two HDR challenges I entered true HDR composites and they didn't do particularly well. So the third time around, I did this, and scored just shy of a 7 and a ribbon:

from

As I explain in my notes, that one's a "reverse HDR", using the tone mapping tools to ADD dynamic range to a flat image. Which, I suppose, in its own way, is a valid enough approach; I certainly do a fair amount of this sort of thing, though I don't really think "I'm making HDR" when I do it.

So as far as the voters are concerned, there are options available, clearly. It's just that true, subtly-applied HDRI isn't one of them, apparently. But that's pretty much always the case with DPC; a little pop, a little wow, will usually trump more subtle approaches. So, would a B/W HDRI work? You're probably right, that it wouldn't do well, but now that you mention it I am tempted to have a go at it :-)

R.
11/14/2011 10:30:22 AM · #8
B/W HDR looks really good (at least I assume this one is HDR):



11/14/2011 10:35:54 AM · #9
Originally posted by fridjo:

B/W HDR looks really good (at least I assume this one is HDR):



In DPC terms, it would pass as HDR, yup. It's probably only made from a single exposure, and it's probably a tone-mapping of a flat scene like my own example I gave. Topaz Adjust or Silver Efex Pro would be my guess. So not "really" HDR, but it fits the image profile of what the voters will be looking for, I imagine.

R.
11/14/2011 10:40:11 AM · #10




Both of my most recent images were B/W HDR.

Well tone mapping like Bear said.
11/14/2011 12:01:19 PM · #11
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by fridjo:

B/W HDR looks really good (at least I assume this one is HDR):



In DPC terms, it would pass as HDR, yup. It's probably only made from a single exposure, and it's probably a tone-mapping of a flat scene like my own example I gave. Topaz Adjust or Silver Efex Pro would be my guess. So not "really" HDR, but it fits the image profile of what the voters will be looking for, I imagine.

R.
It is single image tonemapping in Photomatix then B&W in Silver Efex Pro. I use Photomatix in 90% of my entries, it does wonders to the tonal range. I like HDR. I usually use it in moderation (in my opinion) but sometimes the colors get a little bit over the top :) as in this image:
11/14/2011 06:53:57 PM · #12
FWIW in my personal experiences with HDR is I often end up trying to use it due to harsh lighting. I may get a bit more range but the photo still lacks punch from great lighting. My advice, for whatever it is worth, is to make sure you get great light for a great photo. Bad light, hdr or not, is still bad light and will likely have a negative impact on the final quality.
11/14/2011 09:34:35 PM · #13
Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:

FWIW in my personal experiences with HDR is I often end up trying to use it due to harsh lighting. I may get a bit more range but the photo still lacks punch from great lighting. My advice, for whatever it is worth, is to make sure you get great light for a great photo. Bad light, hdr or not, is still bad light and will likely have a negative impact on the final quality.


While that's certainly very good advice, take a look at this:

from this: (plus two other exposures).

Again, this is using the software to EXPAND tonal range, in a situation where there was basically NO direct light on the land, but this time actually using 3 exposures to push the contrast of the scene apart. HDRI is not just a tool for compressing contrasty scenes; it's equally useful in expanding flat ones.

R.
11/14/2011 10:04:23 PM · #14
Out side of DPC!!

Message edited by author 2011-11-14 22:05:02.
11/20/2011 04:53:41 PM · #15
No motivation what so ever... No ocean side, no big snowy mountains... no cathedrals here... and everything else pretty much boring. and I am sick and tired of taking my cat's photos :-\ simply, boring as hell.
11/21/2011 01:00:35 AM · #16
Awesome pictures showing in the challenge, However, I was always taught HDR was the mergeing of several imanges to capture light and shadows and detail you could not do in a single image. So Pictures of animals, people, etc that don't stand still, can not be a true HDR ( in my humble opinion, for what it's worth) I Love hdr images, haven't mastered getting the beautiful softness I see in some, My eye tends to run to the OVER DETAILED..

I read MargaretN that she uses photomatix on most of her shots, She really gets the softness I love so much in HDR...
11/21/2011 01:14:16 AM · #17
Originally posted by littlemav:

Awesome pictures showing in the challenge, However, I was always taught HDR was the mergeing of several imanges to capture light and shadows and detail you could not do in a single image. So Pictures of animals, people, etc that don't stand still, can not be a true HDR ( in my humble opinion, for what it's worth) I Love hdr images, haven't mastered getting the beautiful softness I see in some, My eye tends to run to the OVER DETAILED..

I read MargaretN that she uses photomatix on most of her shots, She really gets the softness I love so much in HDR...


This is true and not true. You can simulate a true HDR by changing the exposure of a single image by 1 stop above and below what it was captured as by utilizing the flexibility of a RAW shot and then combining these three separate versions of the same image. While this doesn't boost the dynamic range as far as a multi-capture can, you still add 2 stops of detail, one to the highlights and one to the shadows.
11/21/2011 01:19:29 AM · #18
It's also true that animals and people often stand still long enough for HDR and in fact some of the best HDR I've seen are of People, if there is enough light it's easy to fire of three shots without any movement.
11/21/2011 02:27:05 AM · #19
Originally posted by littlemav:

I was always taught HDR was the mergeing of several imanges to capture light and shadows and detail you could not do in a single image. So Pictures of animals, people, etc that don't stand still, can not be a true HDR ( in my humble opinion, for what it's worth)


If the light is good, you can burst shoot 3 RAW images with exposure bracketing of a 4 stops spread in under a second. Develop those RAWs and you have a range or 8 stops with a bit of clipping. Except at dawn of dusk you can capture anything in an HDR.

11/21/2011 02:46:35 AM · #20
Originally posted by jagar:

It's also true that animals and people often stand still long enough for HDR and in fact some of the best HDR I've seen are of People, if there is enough light it's easy to fire of three shots without any movement.


You haven't seen my animals! Aim a camera and it's off to the races... normaly couch potatoes... and most of my friends are moving their mouth too much for HDR 3-5 shot LOL
11/21/2011 03:47:31 AM · #21
Originally posted by littlemav:

Originally posted by jagar:

It's also true that animals and people often stand still long enough for HDR and in fact some of the best HDR I've seen are of People, if there is enough light it's easy to fire of three shots without any movement.


You haven't seen my animals! Aim a camera and it's off to the races... normaly couch potatoes... and most of my friends are moving their mouth too much for HDR 3-5 shot LOL


Same for me actually LOL.
11/21/2011 05:26:48 AM · #22
Originally posted by BrennanOB:

Originally posted by littlemav:

I was always taught HDR was the mergeing of several imanges to capture light and shadows and detail you could not do in a single image. So Pictures of animals, people, etc that don't stand still, can not be a true HDR ( in my humble opinion, for what it's worth)


If the light is good, you can burst shoot 3 RAW images with exposure bracketing of a 4 stops spread in under a second. Develop those RAWs and you have a range or 8 stops with a bit of clipping. Except at dawn of dusk you can capture anything in an HDR.


Also, Photomatix does a pretty good job of removing ghosting in semi automatic mode, allowing to choose which frame should be retained and to reconstruct the background accordingly.
Obviously, that point the dynamic range on the selected areas will be only that afforded by the selected frame, but if the areas on not critical and/or not particularly contrasty, I find deghosting to work quite well.
Adding extra frames with the same exposure can also help the software reconstructing the background more effectively.

here is an example (bit cheesy result, but anyway):


Where I really have troubles with, even when using very fast shutter speed, are relatively vast areas of foliage when it's windy. I guess that point making 3 exposures out of a single raw file is the best option.

Message edited by author 2011-11-21 05:32:03.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 10:47:42 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 10:47:42 AM EDT.