Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Photo Gallery
"Fake" HDR using just one image
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
Jan 31, 2012 17:15:03   #
colo43 Loc: Eastern Plains of Colorado
 
Hey you did a great job on it.. it looks nice!

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 17:22:53   #
Timarron Loc: Southwest
 
docrob wrote:
Timarron wrote:
docrob wrote:
Timarron wrote:
OK - First, for you "HDR haters", just move on, this is not for you and we don't need comments about how garish and overcooked HDR images are. I know all about that perspective.

This post is to share something I found that you can do with existing single images in your collection. Do it just for fun or maybe to create a "keeper" out of just a "so-so" image you already have. The images below might be over the top for some of you, but the point is to show what you can do with ONE image instead of the THREE or more you usually think you need for HDR. Play with the exposures until you get what you like. This is just a "how to" post and not a "how about this pic" post.

I took a single image and made two duplicates. Then, in iPhoto, I adjusted the exposure of one duplicate down two stops and the other exposure up two stops. I then took all 3 images and loaded them into Photomatix, and up popped the "HDR" image. With additional Photoshop or Lightroom editing, you could make these look very HDR'd or less HDR'd, if you get my point.
OK - First, for you "HDR haters", just m... (show quote)


Perfect! And I like your style here of presenting yourself and the point.
And what you did is exactly what (and all) that taking 3 or more images with the camera then downloading then processing via some HDR program does. You get (maybe) identical results.

A photographic analogy is: If the meter tells you the correct exposure is F8 @ 125 than you can get the same "correct" exposure either by using F11 @ 60 or F5.6 @250......Does this make sense relative to your HDR observation?
quote=Timarron OK - First, for you "HDR hate... (show quote)


This analogy makes sense if your intention is to get "correct" exposures, although with the various settings you list above you would get different depths of field. For an HDR image to work, all images have to have the same depth of field so all the same things are in focus. For HDR, you actually only want one "correct" exposure, plus one underexposed and another overexposed. When combined, in theory, you get a clear and crisp photo with all parts (shadows, highlights, etc) visible.
quote=docrob quote=Timarron OK - First, for you ... (show quote)


actually my intention was merely to assert that regardless of whether one combines X of shots taken in the field with the proscribed settings OR takes one image and in the computer makes mulitple copies of said image each image adjusted to compensate for different exposures the HDR effect is the same. Guess it was a little vague to use the analogy of changing Fstops & SS to demonstrate that the effect is exactly the same......

thanks for helping me see straighter
quote=Timarron quote=docrob quote=Timarron OK -... (show quote)


Ok, yes I agree with you about that. I guess my whole reason for starting this thing, was to point out that we can go back in our files and find a single image that was taken before we even had heard about HDR, and make a pseudo HDR image out of it. That is the beauty of some of the new applications available to us. We can resurrect some old photos and dink around with them to give them a new look.

HDR is a bit like Portrait Professional. In the right hands, you can create subtle changes to really enhance a photo. But, if you get a little lead-fingered on the sliders, you end up with something from another planet! This has, if nothing else, given some a new technique to try and at least generated some good discussion. That's what this place is all about....right bro?

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 17:32:23   #
arphot Loc: Massachusetts
 
Timarron wrote:
I took a single image and made two duplicates.


For fun is what its' about sometimes. So have at it. You didn't do too bad. Sadly, the image's resolution doesn't offer much for others to work with satisfactorily.

But, here is my rendition on a single image; not the way you did it.



Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2012 17:40:22   #
Timarron Loc: Southwest
 
arphot wrote:
Timarron wrote:
I took a single image and made two duplicates.


For fun is what its' about sometimes. So have at it. You didn't do too bad. Sadly, the image's resolution doesn't offer much for others to work with satisfactorily.

But, here is my rendition on a single image; not the way you did it.


arphot - That is beautiful! I like it much better than mine actually. So what did you do, just take the original and tweak it in photoshop? Lovely job.... much more realistic.

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 17:47:18   #
Don Schaeffer Loc: Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada
 
I really like what you did with these, made something special out of ordinary shots.

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 17:54:08   #
docrob Loc: Durango, Colorado
 
Timarron wrote:
docrob wrote:
Timarron wrote:
docrob wrote:
Timarron wrote:
OK - First, for you "HDR haters", just move on, this is not for you and we don't need comments about how garish and overcooked HDR images are. I know all about that perspective.

This post is to share something I found that you can do with existing single images in your collection. Do it just for fun or maybe to create a "keeper" out of just a "so-so" image you already have. The images below might be over the top for some of you, but the point is to show what you can do with ONE image instead of the THREE or more you usually think you need for HDR. Play with the exposures until you get what you like. This is just a "how to" post and not a "how about this pic" post.

I took a single image and made two duplicates. Then, in iPhoto, I adjusted the exposure of one duplicate down two stops and the other exposure up two stops. I then took all 3 images and loaded them into Photomatix, and up popped the "HDR" image. With additional Photoshop or Lightroom editing, you could make these look very HDR'd or less HDR'd, if you get my point.
OK - First, for you "HDR haters", just m... (show quote)


Perfect! And I like your style here of presenting yourself and the point.
And what you did is exactly what (and all) that taking 3 or more images with the camera then downloading then processing via some HDR program does. You get (maybe) identical results.

A photographic analogy is: If the meter tells you the correct exposure is F8 @ 125 than you can get the same "correct" exposure either by using F11 @ 60 or F5.6 @250......Does this make sense relative to your HDR observation?
quote=Timarron OK - First, for you "HDR hate... (show quote)


This analogy makes sense if your intention is to get "correct" exposures, although with the various settings you list above you would get different depths of field. For an HDR image to work, all images have to have the same depth of field so all the same things are in focus. For HDR, you actually only want one "correct" exposure, plus one underexposed and another overexposed. When combined, in theory, you get a clear and crisp photo with all parts (shadows, highlights, etc) visible.
quote=docrob quote=Timarron OK - First, for you ... (show quote)


actually my intention was merely to assert that regardless of whether one combines X of shots taken in the field with the proscribed settings OR takes one image and in the computer makes mulitple copies of said image each image adjusted to compensate for different exposures the HDR effect is the same. Guess it was a little vague to use the analogy of changing Fstops & SS to demonstrate that the effect is exactly the same......

thanks for helping me see straighter
quote=Timarron quote=docrob quote=Timarron OK -... (show quote)


Ok, yes I agree with you about that. I guess my whole reason for starting this thing, was to point out that we can go back in our files and find a single image that was taken before we even had heard about HDR, and make a pseudo HDR image out of it. That is the beauty of some of the new applications available to us. We can resurrect some old photos and dink around with them to give them a new look.

HDR is a bit like Portrait Professional. In the right hands, you can create subtle changes to really enhance a photo. But, if you get a little lead-fingered on the sliders, you end up with something from another planet! This has, if nothing else, given some a new technique to try and at least generated some good discussion. That's what this place is all about....right bro?
quote=docrob quote=Timarron quote=docrob quote... (show quote)


^5 dude

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 18:17:40   #
CAM1017 Loc: Chiloquin, Oregon
 
docrob wrote:
Timarron wrote:
docrob wrote:
Timarron wrote:
OK - First, for you "HDR haters", just move on, this is not for you and we don't need comments about how garish and overcooked HDR images are. I know all about that perspective.

This post is to share something I found that you can do with existing single images in your collection. Do it just for fun or maybe to create a "keeper" out of just a "so-so" image you already have. The images below might be over the top for some of you, but the point is to show what you can do with ONE image instead of the THREE or more you usually think you need for HDR. Play with the exposures until you get what you like. This is just a "how to" post and not a "how about this pic" post.

I took a single image and made two duplicates. Then, in iPhoto, I adjusted the exposure of one duplicate down two stops and the other exposure up two stops. I then took all 3 images and loaded them into Photomatix, and up popped the "HDR" image. With additional Photoshop or Lightroom editing, you could make these look very HDR'd or less HDR'd, if you get my point.
OK - First, for you "HDR haters", just m... (show quote)


Perfect! And I like your style here of presenting yourself and the point.
And what you did is exactly what (and all) that taking 3 or more images with the camera then downloading then processing via some HDR program does. You get (maybe) identical results.

A photographic analogy is: If the meter tells you the correct exposure is F8 @ 125 than you can get the same "correct" exposure either by using F11 @ 60 or F5.6 @250......Does this make sense relative to your HDR observation?
quote=Timarron OK - First, for you "HDR hate... (show quote)


This analogy makes sense if your intention is to get "correct" exposures, although with the various settings you list above you would get different depths of field. For an HDR image to work, all images have to have the same depth of field so all the same things are in focus. For HDR, you actually only want one "correct" exposure, plus one underexposed and another overexposed. When combined, in theory, you get a clear and crisp photo with all parts (shadows, highlights, etc) visible.
quote=docrob quote=Timarron OK - First, for you ... (show quote)


actually my intention was merely to assert that regardless of whether one combines X of shots taken in the field with the proscribed settings OR takes one image and in the computer makes mulitple copies of said image each image adjusted to compensate for different exposures the HDR effect is the same. Guess it was a little vague to use the analogy of changing Fstops & SS to demonstrate that the effect is exactly the same......

thanks for helping me see straighter
quote=Timarron quote=docrob quote=Timarron OK -... (show quote)


Not really sure what your intention was but its a great idea and I plan on trying it to see if it helps with the problem I had the last time I tried it.

Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2012 18:24:36   #
arphot Loc: Massachusetts
 
Timarron wrote:
arphot - That is beautiful! I like it much better than mine actually. So what did you do, just take the original and tweak it in photoshop? Lovely job.... much more realistic.


I used the Topaz Adjust plugin to give it a little more zing. But like I said before, the res was low so there was little more I could do without making it a mind-blowing mess. Thanks for the kudos!

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 18:47:53   #
Val Loc: Minnesota
 
I just took a plain image, duplicated it, used topaz, HDR with one click.



after
after...

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 19:03:26   #
Timarron Loc: Southwest
 
Nice job Val. Your changes make it pop. This little technique is going to turn a lot of my marginal photos into much more interesting ones.

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 19:08:28   #
CAM1017 Loc: Chiloquin, Oregon
 
Val wrote:
I just took a plain image, duplicated it, used topaz, HDR with one click.


Hi Val,
What is topaz?

Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2012 19:26:44   #
Donaldaq
 
What amuses me are the folks who rag about HDR pictures and then have no qualms about shopping out parts of an image that they are unhappy with having in the picture. I like your post processing, keep it up.

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 19:29:33   #
Val Loc: Minnesota
 
CAM1017 wrote:
Val wrote:
I just took a plain image, duplicated it, used topaz, HDR with one click.


Hi Val,
What is topaz?


It is a photoshop plugin.

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 19:29:50   #
Val Loc: Minnesota
 
Timarron wrote:
Nice job Val. Your changes make it pop. This little technique is going to turn a lot of my marginal photos into much more interesting ones.


:thumbup:

Reply
Jan 31, 2012 22:27:11   #
KimParks Loc: Kenosha, WI
 
They are all awesome...How do you save to jpeg once the picture is created. I have photomatrix and have trouble saving it. Great idea thank you so much for sharing.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Gallery
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.