Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
HDR Software Comparison
Page <prev 2 of 2
Jan 12, 2012 01:19:57   #
SuKai Loc: California
 
I like number 1 the photomatix best. I think it draws more of the details out. The rocks are sharper and show details the other two don't. I think that's why the water looks different because it sharpened all the fuzz out. The water in the other two examples look like a slow shutter speed effect. JMO :-) all look good.

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 05:00:28   #
Adirondack Hiker Loc: Southern Adirondacks
 
dundeelad wrote:
Jambulee wrote:
arphot wrote:
Adirondack Hiker wrote:
...The scene is brownish for two reasons. First, the time of year, the growing season is over, hence brown leave. Second, there is a very high iron oxide level in this area, contributing to the color of the rocks. Actually, there was iron mining here back in the 1800's.


Thank you. That makes sense.


Thanks Adirondack Hiker for introducing me to a new product I did not know it was out there, I'll try out the demo.


Although Photomatix is the 'gold standard' for HDR, in my opinion, There is another program out there that is very very good. HDR- Express. (Just reviewed in Shutterbig Feb edition.) I bought my copy on-line for $30 if I recall. It was written by a professor in texas with his team. The interesting fact about this program is that all processing is done in 32bit so it uses every bit of info in your original raw files. Once processed you can save as 8 or 16bit Tiff's. for further processing.
The program is very user friendly.
quote=Jambulee quote=arphot quote=Adirondack Hi... (show quote)


I downloaded the trail version, and using the same three images as above, I found the created HDR was severely over exposed in any of the preset mode buttons. Think I will stay with Dynamix HDR. I found PhotoMatix too red, even in the ads.

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 06:08:32   #
arphot Loc: Massachusetts
 
Also, Nik Software HDR Efex Pro (http://www.niksoftware.com/hdrefexpro/en/entry.php) has some incredible possiblilties. one of them being local control of many of the parameters, such as contrast and saturation.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2012 06:47:19   #
Adirondack Hiker Loc: Southern Adirondacks
 
arphot wrote:
Also, Nik Software HDR Efex Pro (http://www.niksoftware.com/hdrefexpro/en/entry.php) has some incredible possiblilties. one of them being local control of many of the parameters, such as contrast and saturation.


I am not a fan of NIK software

Reply
Jan 12, 2012 22:08:26   #
Scubie Loc: Brunswick Georgia
 
Would expect these to show up on a postcard.....maybe a little change in the light, but great...

Reply
Jan 13, 2012 02:15:49   #
Doe Loc: N, Augusta, South Carolina
 
I love HDR photos and as I scrolled through them, when I got to #3 Dynamix HDR, I thought I got stuck in the eye with that stick!!! LOL You don't even notice those sticks until you get to the last one, it really pops!!!

Reply
Jan 14, 2012 19:32:11   #
English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL
 
One can say: This is not the software but the user that determines the quality of the finished product...
When it comes to 'simple' DHR w/o interpretation it would have been interesting to see the -0+ shot to compare...
If the water was clear (as the transparency in the pool seems to indicate), the pic #1 is the most accurate.

*simple = non interpretative result.

Reply
 
 
Jan 15, 2012 15:27:22   #
Jambulee Loc: San Antonio del Mar,Tijuana,Mex
 
Adirondack Hiker wrote:
Using a D5000, with a Nikon 18-105 mm lens, set to a focal length of 24 mm @ f/16, I bracketed 3 images at 1.5 sec, 0.7 sec and 0.3 sec, ISO 200, Aperature priority. I worked up HDR's in three different programs, Photomatrix Light, Elements 8 and Dynamic HDR. Even though they all started with the same data, the results were very diffent. In the Photomatrix one, there appears to be less water coming down the falls. It was also bluer, so I color corrected the water in Elements. The HDR worked up in AUTO mode of Elements 8 was just totally blah. It was very flat. I was most pleased with Dynamic HDR, the image was very vibrant. Try more than one program, to see what works best for you, not all programs are created equal.
Using a D5000, with a Nikon 18-105 mm lens, set to... (show quote)


Hi Everyone and thanks to Adriondack Hiker for getiing me going on this I have been using Photomatix essentials for over a year now and needed to upgrade to a more robust HDR program.

So I did my own comparisons and her is what I came up with.
HDR software comparison

My main concern for HDR software was ease of use right after download--how user friendly is it, quality of the finished product and price.

For ease of use I did not mess with a lot of the controls but clicked on some of the presets in the "natural range" of adjustments as I prefer a more dynamic look but not too artificial. So all the images posted as examples were done with very little manipulation.

Expose 2 from Unified Color gave me the worst result as it was unable to align the clouds and water or remove ghosting even though I did click on the button which was supposed to enable that option. The image looks very muddy as well. Cost $149.00

Dynamic Photo HDR did a better job however the ease of use was poor. It did not read the EV values in my metadata so I had to enter it (hopefully I got it right). This would be a real pain if I had a larger number of photos. Also manually aligning the combinations of images--4 possible combinations with 3 photos--and more combinations if I had 4 or 5 images, again not very user friendly. The following two programs did a great job of aligning my 3 images and had no issues reading EV values. I did not do any further work on the final image to make it look more like Photomatix Pro or NIK HDR EFFEX PRO.
Cost $149.00

PhotoMatix Pro did an excellent job and gave me a good base image to further fine tune until I got what I want. It came very close right after tone mapping for the look I was after. The only draw back is the amount of noise which would require and another program to reduce. Cost $99.00

NIK HDR EFFEX PRO was excellent as well and gave results very close to Photomatix Pro. The amount of noise was the same as Photomatix Pro also needing another program to reduce. Although I did not use the "U point" algorithms on the image I really like the ability to control the HDR effects locally. This adds a level of control not found in either of the above programs. Cost $99.00 plus $49.00 for my upgrade to Define 2 for noise reduction.

Expose 2 example
Expose 2 example...

Dynamic Photo HDR
Dynamic Photo HDR...

Photomatix Pro
Photomatix Pro...

NIK HDR EFFEX Pro
NIK HDR EFFEX Pro...

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.