Photomatix Pro: Am learning HDR and considering Photomatix Pro. Would like to hear views from those who have used it. Its website at hdrsoft.com has a video tutorial which makes it...

Aeneas Loc: Somers, NY

Am learning HDR and considering Photomatix Pro. Would like to hear views from those who have used it. Its website at hdrsoft.com
has a video tutorial which makes it seem simple to use, even when editing the photos.

Bob Yankle Loc: Burlington, NC

It has a wealth of presets that will serve as a starting point for a certain look - but take the time to use the settings on the right side of the panel to tweak them until they're "just right".

mallen1330 Loc: Chicago western suburbs

Aeneas wrote:

Am learning HDR and considering Photomatix Pro. Would like to hear views from those who have used it. Its website at hdrsoft.com
has a video tutorial which makes it seem simple to use, even when editing the photos.

Photomatix Pro IS easy to use and yet has many ways to dive in deeper and refine your work. If you take a lot of bracketed shots like I do for real estate photos, it has the best batch processing functions. I come home with 300 files, set the batch going and while I put away my camera gear, after a few minutes, the HDR results are complete.

rwilson1942 Loc: Houston, TX

I use it and like the presets as a starting point.
Learning it was easy.

mallen1330 Loc: Chicago western suburbs

mallen1330 wrote:

Photomatix Pro IS easy to use and yet has many ways to dive in deeper and refine your work. If you take a lot of bracketed shots like I do for real estate photos, it has the best batch processing functions. I come home with 300 files, set the batch going and while I put away my camera gear, after a few minutes, the HDR results are complete.

Also... Photomatix has the best ghost removal function of all HDR programs on the market. When you have moving objects -- people, animals, wind in the trees --- You simply select areas, and which frame to use for that particular selection. See my example here: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-396321-1.html

djb663 Loc: Massachusetts

If you are using a Mac, Trey Ratcliffe (the guy that made Photomatix Pro famous) has his own program now called Aurora HDR. In my opinion, having used both programs, Aurora is far superior to Photomatix.

Jersey guy Loc: New Joisey

Now that someone has raised the issue of HDR, can someone please explain to me what is the difference (or interaction) between this program and others like it, and the term, "tone mapping"? I seem to see both terms used when discussing HDR but the implication is that they are two different steps in producing the finished product.

mallen1330 Loc: Chicago western suburbs

Jersey guy wrote:

Now that someone has raised the issue of HDR, can someone please explain to me what is the difference (or interaction) between this program and others like it, and the term, "tone mapping"? I seem to see both terms used when discussing HDR but the implication is that they are two different steps in producing the finished product.

HDR is a generic term (not a processing step per se): High Dynamic Range is used to describe images that show details in the shadows as well as in the highlights. Ansel Adams was the master at getting the maximum dynamic range in his prints with dodging and burning. See his book: The Print.

Tone mapping is ONE method available for digital images to achieve greater DR. It may be done using software like Photomatix with bracketed shots, or with local tone mapping on a single shot (PaintShop Pro has a very nice function for this).

HDR Fusion is another method (supported by Photomatix), that in most situations results in a more "natural" looking image.

Blending is another method, where bracketed shots are layered and luminance levels are selectively masked and adjusted with blending levels.

There are a ton of tutorials and definitions on the web for all these ideas and methods.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

Aeneas wrote:

Am learning HDR and considering Photomatix Pro. Would like to hear views from those who have used it. Its website at hdrsoft.com
has a video tutorial which makes it seem simple to use, even when editing the photos.

I have both Photomatix Pro and NIK HDR EFEX Pro. The latter has the advantage of being free. But, I have found that the NIK product is more prone to creating haloing than Photomatix.

jim quist Loc: Missouri

I also have both, Photomatix Pro is nice.

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

Photomatix is VERY easy to use. You will be processing images in just a few minutes. Then you'll start learning to use the sliders
instead of the presets and thats when you can really get into it.

travisdeland Loc: deland, FL

Aeneas wrote:

Am learning HDR and considering Photomatix Pro. Would like to hear views from those who have used it. Its website at hdrsoft.com
has a video tutorial which makes it seem simple to use, even when editing the photos.

I have it and use it as a standalone program. I didn't watch any videos, but was able to figure it out-and still learn new things about it-without too much trouble. I love the tonemapping section. It also does HDR very intuitively, and quickly. I've been very happy I bought this.

Whuff Loc: Marshalltown, Iowa

Photomatix Pro is a very easy to use program that is extremely intuitive to use. One function that is truly useful is the ability to use the lasso tool to select an area to replace with either of the 3 exposures. This comes in handy for sky areas that end up looking funky due to the processing. I reccomend it.

Walt

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

they have two versions, check them out, you might not need the $100 version.

Dan Wik

I have used both Photomatrix Pro and Aurora HDR Pro and the latter gives much more realistic HDR results and most reviews rank it considerably higher, most often #1.