The why's of HDR: Many articles are available as to how to DO an HDR image not many explain in simple terms why one would choose to bracket shots. HDR is two procedures after the shots...

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

Many articles are available as to how to DO an HDR image not many explain in simple terms why one would choose to bracket shots. HDR is two procedures after the shots are taken. The first procedure simply combines the bracketed shots. HDR software gives you the option of exporting the image at this stage or going on and Tone Mapping the work. The tone mapping is what gives one the bright colors and 3D type effects associated with HDR.
Exporting your image BEFORE tone mapping enables you to capture all the available dynamic range whilst achieving a very natural look.

Follow the link for further reading

http://www.picturecorrect.com/tips/hdr-photography-how-to-do-it-and-why/

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

Billyspad wrote:

Many articles are available as to how to DO an HDR... (show quote)

This could turn into an interesting thread if you could possibly lead us into participation and discussion of the techniques you find most successful, and share some examples to help us see it for ourselves.

I struggle with getting as good a result from a blended image as I get from a single image. So I know I must be doing something wrong, since my camera is a second class citizen in terms of sensor size. Theoretically, I ought to get a lot more from a bracketed set than from one image. But what I get is mostly trouble.

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

minniev wrote:

This could turn into an interesting thread if you ... (show quote)

You have perfect material for a bracketed set in that old Cady your trying to sell. Steady hand hold or tripod if your not steady and 3 shots 2 EV's apart. Photoshop File>Automate>Merge to HDR Pro. Load photos when box opens. Tick Attempt to Auto Align Images. Computer will think a bit then display your merged images. Tick Remove Ghosts and in drop down box change mode to 32 bit. Click OK and image opens in PS. Save this as a Tiff and open it in Camera Raw and treat is as you would any other file. When you open the Tiff it may look very flat but Camera Raw will cure that.
Only you can decide if you get more detail by doing this but at a guess you will have more detail in the wheels arches the rust will show up more ie be more interesting and you should have more detail showing through the glass.
Maybe try this at midday when you would not normally take a shot unless it was something you could not revisit

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

Billyspad wrote:

You have perfect material for a bracketed set in t... (show quote)

I'll try it when I'm up there tomorrow.

mallen1330 Loc: Chicago western suburbs

I shoot a lot of architectural interiors in my business. Bracketing is the only way to get to a final image that shows detail in the dark shadows of the interior, as well as the highlights from the windows. As humans perceiving the space in real time, we process the different levels and our brain puts them together for a composite experience where we "see" all the details. Bracketing and HDR software does the same. "HDR" has been misunderstood to mean only "Tonemapping". For my real estate and architectural photos, I use HDR Fusion only. For some "urban landscape" shots, I blend a fusion result with a subtle tonemapped result, to selectively bring out some "glow" and "umpth" for effect.

jenny Loc: in hiding:)

Hi Billy, looks like you got the HOW nailed there! And as for the WHY, is it reasonable to add a cautionary note about
using HDR for those scenes with high DR, that of not making it too obvious. Some of it shown in the 'hog here done in glaring white
brilliant sunshine but the shadows were brought up so much as to be a totally unrealistic obvious image that was messed with.

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

jenny wrote:

Hi Billy, looks like you got the HOW nailed there! And as for the WHY, is it reasonable to add a cautionary note about
using HDR for those scenes with high DR, that of not making it too obvious. Some of it shown in the 'hog here done in glaring white
brilliant sunshine but the shadows were brought up so much as to be a totally unrealistic obvious image that was messed with.

I actually do not mind images that howl HDR at me if its well done and the subject is interesting. We seem to accept quite amateur looks given to an image by Topazing them to death but look down our photographic noses as HDR? Anyone not familiar with good and quite obvious HDR Google Trey Ratcliff who worked with Apple and Macphun to produce Aurora HDR software. Stunning work buts its HDR so we do not like that do we!
Merging without tone mapping is just a way to compensate for the shortcomings of the camera sensor and compensate for less than perfect lighting

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

minniev wrote:

....
I struggle with getting as good a result from a blended image as I get from a single image. So I know I must be doing something wrong, since my camera is a second class citizen in terms of sensor size. Theoretically, I ought to get a lot more from a bracketed set than from one image. But what I get is mostly trouble.

What kind of camera are you using?

My 1/1.7" Pentax Q-7 has a form of HDR built-in.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Billyspad wrote:

Many articles are available as to how to DO an HDR... (show quote)

Good info, I've also read some of Jimmy McIntyre's stuff about digital blending, will have to learn how to bracket one of these days.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

mallen1330 wrote:

I shoot a lot of architectural interiors in my bus... (show quote)

Sounds like a very logical approach to produce good results Mike.

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

rehess wrote:

What kind of camera are you using?

My 1/1.7" Pentax Q-7 has a form of HDR built-in.

Olympus EM1, which has built in HDR but I don't care for the results, on the rare occasions that I do HDR, I shoot a 3 - 5 shot bracket and deal with it in some mix of LR, PS and Aurora. But the issues of the odd miss on a specific tonal area, and the challenge of things that MOVE (animals, clouds, leaves, water, people) end up disappointing me.

mallen1330 Loc: Chicago western suburbs

minniev wrote:

... But the issues of the odd miss on a specific tonal area, and the challenge of things that MOVE (animals, clouds, leaves, water, people) end up disappointing me.

Photomatix has great functionality for selectively removing ghosts (things that move...). See: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-396321-1.html