docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

Of late there has been much discussion about the differences and merits of images processed as HDR; and images created using in-camera multipe exposures. The two are totally distinct. As I see it, images created using HDR technology calls for the photographer to take at least 3 images bracketed then merged into one image by software designed to "read" the best of the highlights and shadows using the correct exposure as a "guide" to create a composite of all three or more "captures." Once this is done, additional processing may be applied.

Creating images using a very old technique called in-camera multiple exposures is not a feature common to all dslr's. Nikon has it. Canon, I think does not. The rest - no clue. I use Nikon D200. It allows me to take up to 10 frames per image. Generally I create 2, 3, 4, or 9 frame in-camera multiple exposures. The subject tells me which number works best - as the examples demonstrate - and all is highly subjective.

nyweb2001

You're right....MUCH confusion on this site concerning HDR Processing versus combining multiple images ! HDR is a TOTALLY different ball game. It involves Tone Mapping 3 or more combined images as well as other processing techniques. This involves a whole different software program as well as a learning curve to HDR manipulation.
Here's a photo gallery from Photomatix's user gallery.....

http://www.hdrsoft.com/gallery/index.php

MtnMan Loc: ID

Many nice pictures.

I know this is a fighting point for some purists but a fair number of the pictures on that site are made with one exposure. They create multiple images with different effective EV from that one exposure and then combine in the software.

Also many new cameras do HDR processing in camera. My Nikon only uses two exposures but a little looking shows many new ones that use three and some allow more.

docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

btw none of the photos displayed in this post are HDR.....in case there was confusion.....

Al FR-153 Loc: Chicago Suburbs

Okay - Here we go, giving away my age.... Multi exposure used to happen in the days of early 35mm and before. If you forgot to wind your film after each shot, you would double (triple, etc) expose your FILM, resulting in an unusual, multiple exposure photo that was usually classified as BAD. Then someone found a way to make those interesting. About the same time, the camera manufactures started installing a shutter locking so that you HAD to wind the film before you could take another shot. Again, some did, some didn't (just like today). I have an early 60s Ricoh SLR that will double expose and a 70s Yashika SLR that will not. I don't remember who came out with the first camera that wouldn't double expose (possibly Polaroid in the 50s) but it was a common MISTAKE when I started shooting.

HDR was still 40 years in the future. We bracketed photos to be sure we got a good one, but HDR, as we know it today, didn't come along until computerized post processing.

docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado

yep my first camera was a Canon Ftb.......back then maybe they were mistakes.......glad I still make them - only on purpose!

rockgardenplants Loc: Utah

Been there, done that but it turned out awesome! In the mid 90's, I was at Devil's Tower in Wyoming, USA (where "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind" was, in part, filmed). I had a set up with a 35mm film Olympus camera with a HEAVY Manfrotto tripod (for some reason I remember that one mile walk with that tripod. :oops: ). I took the first photo and, still sweating and breathing hard, I didn't wind the film. Some big fluffy clouds had moved in and changed the light (the light changed but my settings didn't), 2nd photo taken, clouds moved in even more, changing the light, 3rd photo taken and finished! I thought I had three separate photos of this great geologic wonder! After the trip, I had the rolls developed and looked at my "mistake". It wasn't nearly as "HDR'd" as the ones that are coming onto to the web but it definitely has the overlap effect with dreamy clouds and amazing highlights on the tower. I still have the negatives of that trip and I'm definitely going to look for them and have them digitized. I'll post the image here as soon as it's done!

MtnMan Loc: ID

Or a Nikon D5100 and a plethora of other new cameras that do it in the camera.

Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip

third image I find engrossingly interesting