Just wondering how you guys do it


Carol8345

Link Posted 22/10/2016 - 23:23
When you do HDR, do you use your camera settings, or process it in Photoshop?
My Instagram

QuestionableCarrot

Link Posted 22/10/2016 - 23:47
I messed around with HDR for a couple of weeks and decided it was bloody awful. The only time I "liked" it was when doing indoor church shots or low light abandoned buildings. That being said HDR is getting better with the advance in editing techniques.

As for how I processed it? Download Photomatix - just bracket 3 5 or 7 shots and toss them into that program

Job done
Learn how to live and you'll know how to die; learn how to die, and you'll know how to live.

Check out ones photographs on Flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/awprentice/

Fishbones

Link Posted 22/10/2016 - 23:57
As with QuestionableCarrot I use 3 or 5 shots and then in LR I use photomerge>HDR to merge the images into my final shot. I tend to use a more natural process rather than get the unnatural greens etc but as yet have not used the in camera HDR effect. Photomatix is def a good choice if you can get it
"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop." Ansel Adams

johnriley

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 01:03
HDR is best used sparingly IMHO, but I do use Photomatix with 7 exposures,
Best regards, John

Carol8345

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 01:15
Wow, just amazing, I can't believe it! I've been struggling in photoshop with 3 images for a month or so now and I never get the result I'm looking for. I downloaded Photomax and there it was...Thank you.
My Instagram

bwlchmawr

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 07:11
The thing with HDR, Carol, is to use it with subtlety. Just recover some highlights and slightly lift shadow detail. Maybe increase mid-tone contrast if things look a little "flat". The real world has bright highlights and deep shadows and if you render everything flat, which you can do in Photoshop with RAW files from modern sensors, things can quickly get to look like a cheap 1950s book illustration.

Having said that, some blokes love the effect and can't get enough of it.
Best wishes,

Andrew

"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050 http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05

redbusa99

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 10:46
Photomatix is probably the best HDR software out there definitely way better than in camera. for a start you can load RAW files into it whereas in camera you are stuck with jpeg with nothing like the room to play to get what you want. as for how to use it, that is up to you I have seen very natural HDR , done some myself, also some way over the top that I have really liked, which can be fun. check out a guy called Captain Kimo on youtube and watch a couple of videos on his technique, he uses Photomatix to process
K3 II and the odd lens or 2

Flickr
Last Edited by redbusa99 on 23/10/2016 - 10:46

Blythman

Carol8345

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 13:59



Sorry the watermark is still on it, I havent decided to buy it yet.
My Instagram

Mag07

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 15:04
Photomatix is handy and good value for money, that said, after a while, I found it just wasn't giving me enough subtle control. It seems fine for simple exposure fusions, but the actual tone mapping options are mostly on the 'harsh' side imo. So personally I am back to Photoshop and learning blending exposures with luminosity masks. I'm far from skilled in the process but even clumsily following tutorials is giving me much nicer results than Photomatix. As for in camera HDR, it's mostly horrendous haha.

One thing to consider as well, is print. DR of paper is less than the DR of digital sensors; it's very easy to ignore that and end up with a subpar print because we pushed the light a step too far in whichever direction; rather tough to judge 'by eye' in Photomatix.

Photomatix is good for processing those pics that will likely stay on your PC, but for those special shots, I think it's worth the time to learn to process them manually. It is, however, time consuming initially. Struggling to find that time myself. There are action sets that help with the processing out there, both free and premium, and they do speed things up substantially. I suppose, with time, one is able to develop their own.

I also bracket often instead of using grad NDs; when blending, I am not after the typical HDR look, and for that I find Photomatix nearly useless.
'Photography...it remembers little things, long after you have forgotten....' (Aaron Siskind)
Last Edited by Mag07 on 23/10/2016 - 15:10

Chrism8

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 16:22
Hi Mag07,

You an tweak photomatix quite subtly then tweak further to suit in photoshop.

It's not a bad place your start as long as you don't go ott to start with and follow it's defaults.
Chris

www.chrismillsphotography.co.uk

" A Hangover is something that occupies the Head you neglected to use the night before".

-------------------------------------------------------------
K1 - Sigma 85mm F1.4, Pentax 150 -450 F4.5 / 5.6, Pentax FA 24 - 70 F2.8

Sigma 100-300 F4, Samyang 14mm F2.8, Sigma 70-200 F2.8,

K5iis - Sigma 17 - 70 F2.8, Sigma 70 - 300 F3.5/F5.6, Sigma 18 - 200 F3.6 / F4.5.

StephenHampshire

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 16:56
Chrism8 wrote:
Hi Mag07,

You an tweak photomatix quite subtly then tweak further to suit in photoshop.

It's not a bad place your start as long as you don't go ott to start with and follow it's defaults.

I second this. Photomatix can give great and realistic results, but the presets are quite harsh. I normally use 5 shots spaced at 1/2 stops in fusions
Everything Changes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arleimages/

Mag07

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 18:14
Chrism8 wrote:
Hi Mag07,

You an tweak photomatix quite subtly then tweak further to suit in photoshop.

It's not a bad place your start as long as you don't go ott to start with and follow it's defaults.

It's not a bad place to start at all I use it regularly. But in my humble opinion, it only has 2 benefits over manual blending - it's a time saver, and the learning curve is not as steep. It's a very good tool but for me, the creative control is limited in comparison to the alternative method that I am exploring.
'Photography...it remembers little things, long after you have forgotten....' (Aaron Siskind)

alfpics

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 18:41
Another for Photomatix pro from me!
Andy

Carol8345

Link Posted 23/10/2016 - 20:54
I like the ease of the Photomatix, so many times I go through the whole step of the three images on Photoshop and come up with a dark image that's basically unusable, probably due to my inexperience. Today, I took the same images and used the presets on the app and they came out beautiful, giving me the deep colors and cool contrast.

Here's my problem, I live in the city just outside the big city so variety of my shots are limited. To get a decent landscape I have to drive 3 or more hours scouting different spots just to come home empty handed so to speak. After working a 60 hour week, I don't always have the energy . With this program (thanks to you guys), I can add some variety and character to my city shots. I do agree with Mag though, I need to continue learning Photoshop and not get too lazy...lol
My Instagram
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.