HDR setting or exposure bracketing
Posted 10/04/2012 - 12:42
Link
JAK wrote:
I've not had another go with mine yet but feel sure it would be much the same. It's the same image file after all.
Re not looking like HDR, that can often be a good thing - just a subtle improvement in the dynamic range without going over the top. The PS one has the best contrast with the hedge on the left looking much more detailed. And your Photomatix one has brought the sun out too!
If the the photo directly out of the camera doesn't look like the way you remember it when you took it, it seems HDR can help you achieve the look you were expecting. Some HDR is truly over the top but even then if that's what you want, who's to say it's wrong?
What I really need to do is take multiple exposures for an HDR and compare them to the result of processing just a single RAW file, along with an in camera version too. It could be the K-5 just doesn't get s much benefit from HDR as most other cameras with an inherent lower dynamic range.
John
Its a pity it couldn't bring the sun out in real life LOL It was a very cloudy overcast day. I've not had another go with mine yet but feel sure it would be much the same. It's the same image file after all.
Re not looking like HDR, that can often be a good thing - just a subtle improvement in the dynamic range without going over the top. The PS one has the best contrast with the hedge on the left looking much more detailed. And your Photomatix one has brought the sun out too!
If the the photo directly out of the camera doesn't look like the way you remember it when you took it, it seems HDR can help you achieve the look you were expecting. Some HDR is truly over the top but even then if that's what you want, who's to say it's wrong?
What I really need to do is take multiple exposures for an HDR and compare them to the result of processing just a single RAW file, along with an in camera version too. It could be the K-5 just doesn't get s much benefit from HDR as most other cameras with an inherent lower dynamic range.
John
would be interesting to see the difference with the in camera and the software using more files.
Posted 10/04/2012 - 14:02
Link
annieogg wrote:
Its a pity it couldn't bring the sun out in real life LOL It was a very cloudy overcast day.
would be interesting to see the difference with the in camera and the software using more files.
The sun is out here today!!Its a pity it couldn't bring the sun out in real life LOL It was a very cloudy overcast day.
would be interesting to see the difference with the in camera and the software using more files.
Well you can't compare what you haven't got so a challenge to find some suitable scenes and make some comparisons?
John
John K
Posted 10/04/2012 - 14:44
Link
This is HDR with seven exposures:
[IMG]http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff250/johnriley1uk/003-Ripon-Cathedral-1.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff250/johnriley1uk/003-Ripon-Cathedral-1.jpg[/IMG]
Best regards, John
Posted 10/04/2012 - 23:05
Link
John, Is that 7 shots combined in the camera or 7 individual shots combined in software?
Bernard
Bernard
Posted 10/04/2012 - 23:08
Link
7 shots at different exposures (-3, -2, -1, 0, +1, +2, +3) combined in Photomatix.
Best regards, John
Posted 10/04/2012 - 23:46
Link
That is certainly the way to do it John, a superb example of how effective a good HDR can be.
Regards
David
Regards
David
Posted 11/04/2012 - 01:37
Link
miles500 wrote:
I have been using a package called Zoner which is a sort of PSE clone from Eastern Europe. It seems to have a very good exposure merging and tonemapping facility which offers quite a lot of control and I have been pleased with the look of the resulting images. My previous attempts at HDR church interiors has been using the inbuilt HDR facility in the K5 which were not in my eyes quite as successful.
Last week I took some bracketed exposures in a German Cathedral ( 3x 2ev) , but I realise that I should have gone beyond three exposures - certainly 5 and maybe 7 as John Riley suggests. I have had no problem aligning 3 handheld images but wonder whether 7 would require a tripod.
You don't need multiple exposures to get HDR shots with a K-5. Completely unnecessary and a waste of time. The K-5 has plenty enough dynamic range. You can 5 stop under expose and still recover.I have been using a package called Zoner which is a sort of PSE clone from Eastern Europe. It seems to have a very good exposure merging and tonemapping facility which offers quite a lot of control and I have been pleased with the look of the resulting images. My previous attempts at HDR church interiors has been using the inbuilt HDR facility in the K5 which were not in my eyes quite as successful.
Last week I took some bracketed exposures in a German Cathedral ( 3x 2ev) , but I realise that I should have gone beyond three exposures - certainly 5 and maybe 7 as John Riley suggests. I have had no problem aligning 3 handheld images but wonder whether 7 would require a tripod.
just take one image and expose to avoid clipping.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 11/04/2012 - 10:05
Link
I will try a drastic underexposure and see what results. Thanks for suggestion - it could save a lot of time, if it works for me!
Miles
Posted 11/04/2012 - 13:13
Link
Drastic underexposure will just give you noise in the shadows if you try and bring out any detail. The purpose of the +1, +2 and +3 exposures is to record shadow detail properly and avoid that noise.
Best regards, John
Posted 11/04/2012 - 15:46
Link
johnriley wrote:
Drastic underexposure will just give you noise in the shadows if you try and bring out any detail. The purpose of the +1, +2 and +3 exposures is to record shadow detail properly and avoid that noise.
Yes that makes sense to me!
Drastic underexposure will just give you noise in the shadows if you try and bring out any detail. The purpose of the +1, +2 and +3 exposures is to record shadow detail properly and avoid that noise.
Miles
Posted 12/04/2012 - 00:15
Link
miles500 wrote:
It also makes sense that the dynamic Range of the K-5 is that good you can bring up the shadows an awful lot without noise being a problem.johnriley wrote:
Drastic underexposure will just give you noise in the shadows if you try and bring out any detail. The purpose of the +1, +2 and +3 exposures is to record shadow detail properly and avoid that noise.
Yes that makes sense to me!Drastic underexposure will just give you noise in the shadows if you try and bring out any detail. The purpose of the +1, +2 and +3 exposures is to record shadow detail properly and avoid that noise.
And in any case, no one is suggesting drastically underexposing, the idea is to expose so you don't clip highlights.
And even if you're intended shot means that even the K-5 can't cope with the boost in shadows there's no need to take squillions of exposures 1 stop apart. Just take 2 shots, one to cater for the very darks.
Anyway drastic underexposure will NOT give you noise in the shadows that's of any problem....
See here for proof
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/170098-k-5-dynamic-range-happy-face.html
but don't take his word for it. You have a K-5 so try it. Amazing
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
4192 posts
16 years
Scarborough,
North Yorks.
Re not looking like HDR, that can often be a good thing - just a subtle improvement in the dynamic range without going over the top. The PS one has the best contrast with the hedge on the left looking much more detailed. And your Photomatix one has brought the sun out too!
If the the photo directly out of the camera doesn't look like the way you remember it when you took it, it seems HDR can help you achieve the look you were expecting. Some HDR is truly over the top but even then if that's what you want, who's to say it's wrong?
What I really need to do is take multiple exposures for an HDR and compare them to the result of processing just a single RAW file, along with an in camera version too. It could be the K-5 just doesn't get s much benefit from HDR as most other cameras with an inherent lower dynamic range.
John