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.
Photomatrix
Elements 8
Dynamic HDR
are these the results you get without tone mapping or the default tone map. HDR allows so much creative input when tone mapping and each program uses a different logarithm. The program to use is the one you feel obtains the look and feel you want with an easy of use.
fotogk wrote:
are these the results you get without tone mapping or the default tone map. HDR allows so much creative input when tone mapping and each program uses a different logarithm. The program to use is the one you feel obtains the look and feel you want with an easy of use.
Photomatrix and Dynamic HDR both tone map.
Odd how there's a lot of brown in all of them. I'd love to work these myself. Oh, and yes I'm going to say it: Photomatix not Photomatrix
Adirondack Hiker wrote:
fotogk wrote:
are these the results you get without tone mapping or the default tone map. HDR allows so much creative input when tone mapping and each program uses a different logarithm. The program to use is the one you feel obtains the look and feel you want with an easy of use.
Photomatrix and Dynamic HDR both tone map.
As mentioned earlier.........by using the adjustment sliders you can get about any hue, exposure, saturation, look you want so comparing is not an easy thing. With this exception, which program works best for you.
SteveH
Loc: Putnam Valley NY & Boynton Beach, Fla
I for one prefer the effect that you got in your first shot - Photomatix. I like the way the rocks look in the foreground and the shadows show more detail behind the waterfall.
Abbu
Loc: New Jersey
Isn't photomatix looks like painting??? I love the first one :)
I LOVE the Dynamic HDR. I think the 1st one is too busy looking or too sharp looking. I vote #3
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)
thank you for taking the time to do that and to share the results with others.
Number 3 is nice. Number 1 is awesome. Forget number 2.
Thanks for doing this. I am about to get into HDR, and this clears things up a bit. (Ha, Ha. No pun intended.)
arphot wrote:
Odd how there's a lot of brown in all of them. I'd love to work these myself. Oh, and yes I'm going to say it: Photomatix not Photomatrix
Whats an extra "R" among friends. 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.
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.
Jambulee
Loc: San Antonio del Mar,Tijuana,Mex
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.
dundeelad
Loc: Originally UK. Current West Dundee, Illinois
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.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.