JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Here is an example of using Photomatix to combine 3 images separated in 2 stop steps. And then the final result was tweaked a bit in Photoshop to end up with the look I wanted.

This was taken using a Sony A99 with a Minolta 35-105 at 35mm.

Adding a 2nd example using Franzis HDR Projects Professional 5. A couple differences I see are the ghosting in the tree branches in Franzis HDR Projects Professional. It also has considerably more whiteness surrounding the tree branches, especially on the right, in front of the distant hills. Photomatix did much better with both these areas, although a little bit of whiteness around the branches can be seen, but not as much as Franzis HDR Projects Professional.

Adding Lightroom converting the 3 images into an HDR.

Adding example done using Photoshop to create HDR.

Adding example using NIK HDR Efex 2

Adding HDR using Affinity


One additional point I should make is that all these HDR programs produce results that have varying emphasis on colors and intensity and so on. For any given result, further tweaking can be done. So judging them on these criteria are not really valid. What is more important are things like ghosting, masking properly, etc., producing a result that can be transformed into what you want. Considering these examples, I tried harder on the Photomatix example and then thought to add the others.

original - normal

(Download)

original - minus 2 stops

(Download)

original - plus 2 stops

(Download)

HDR using Photomatix and then tweaking in Photoshop

(Download)

Franzis HDR Projects Professional 5

(Download)

HDR produced by Lightroom Only

(Download)

HDR using Photoshop

(Download)

NIK HDR Efex 2

(Download)

HDR using Affinity

(Download)

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains

I'm interested in acquiring some expertise in HDR and greatly appreciate you posting these images and comments. If you could only use one HDR software program from now on which one would you choose and why? Many thanks.

Shakey Loc: Traveling again to Norway and other places.

Thanks for posting the interesting comparisons, Jim. I use Affinity Photo and GIMP. Affinity gives better results when in the Develop Persona if you go to White Balance and change the default to suit the image. In this case add more yellow to the Temperature setting. That way you get something like the image below. I confess I added a few layers while playing around with it.

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

And was the Photomatix without Photoshop not so good? And nothing was done to the Lightroom or Photoshop HDRs after the HDR process?

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

The Photomatix version was good, and I mostly boosted vibrance a bit to make it look even better. I did this one first, and satisfied myself as to what I could produce. Then I thought to try the others.

I am torn between Photomatix, NIK HDR Efex 2 and Affinity as to which one is the best. Although I admit that I am not real experienced with Affinity as my natural inclination is to use Lightroom and Photoshop for most editing and tweaking. Using only Lightroom or only Photoshop for HDR were more bland and would need additional tweaking. Franzis HDR Projects Profession was in last place, but I must admit, it was the easiest and fastest to use. For some people, ease of use and speed win out over slower and more tweaking needed, especially if they don't pixel peep.

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

I was actually wondering if the Lightroom and Photoshop versions could have been "tweaked" to get similar results to the best aspects of the other software. I liked how Photomatix, NIK and Affinity seemed to bring out the definition of the hills in the "haze". If "tweaking" in Lightroom or Photoshop was up to that task I would go with either of those as my first choices. My take is Lightroom comes in first (with a little more definition in the mid-point hills) and Photoshop second (with even a bit more definition needed in the mid-point hills).
Nice work and thanks for the comparison.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I tried to improve the Lightroom version, but I don't like it as well as Photomatix, NIK and Affinity versions. One area where it fails is around the tree branches on the right where the background is brighter than the lighter colored haze of the hills. I treated it with DxO (after converting the .DNG file to .TIF) and then back to Lightroom. But I can't seem to correct the background haze intensity. This seems to be a place that shows where HDR conversion has a real difficulty in handling. I also think I shifted too far to the yellow.

Lightroom method with additional tweaking in DxO and Lightroom

(Download)

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

Thank you for the extra work. You have quite a large selection of tools in your kit.
And looking again at the versions, I see your point. It seems (to my eye) that the Photomatrix and Photoshop versions handled that section the best (or at least matched it best to the area directly to the left).

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I am thinking I like the NIK HDR Efex 2 version best. Here, I have tweaked the original in Lightroom to give it more punch. It also handles the haze background behind the tree on the right side better than the other versions.

NIK HDR Efex 2 before Lightroom tweak

(Download)

NIK HDR Efex 2 after Lightroom tweak

(Download)

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

Thanks again!

hpucker99 Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I have found that I take too many bracketed photos and HDR is sometimes no better than a properly exposed single shot. If you take the final settings from the HDR output in Lightroom and apply it to a single (normal exposure setting), I find that you get a photo that is similar or identical to the HDR version.

As an example, I took only the original file and brought it into Lightroom. I adjusted the shadows and dark sliders to lighten the dark areas, adjusted the lights down and raised the dehaze setting to bring out more of the sky detail and came out with a photo that has more detail in the dark areas, but without blown highlights or some of the artifacts from excessive slider use in HDR.

(Download)

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Yes, often times you can achieve very good results with just Lightroom. But in this case, the NIK HDR Efex 2 with the Lightroom tweak that I posted looks more dramatic. I couldn't achieve quite the same results using just the middle image.

hpucker99 Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

One conclusion that can be reached by the various techniques, is that we can judge the results and decide which one we like. We should be asking is the one I have chosen resemble what I saw? We can rate and judge by details in the shadows, brightness, clarity and other aspects, but that results in a photo that may not accurately reflect what we saw.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I don't always try to exactly duplicate what I saw. And sunsets fall in that category. Sunsets SOOC are usually rather underwhelming and a little work can bring out the beauty. I much prefer to look at an enhanced sunset than the original.