photomatix

So I have I got this correct? a psuedo HDR image is constructed from one raw shot that is then edited to produce a range of exposures, 3 or more. Where real HDR is sevral raw shots (of the same subject) each having a differnec of 2 f stops, so +2,+4,+6, 0, -2, -4, -6 Is that right.

Cheers

Johna

And to add a second question for the specialists around here.
Is it safe to say a real HDR picture sequence is advisable if used with static non movable subjects ? And a pseudo HDR picture sequence is the better option when people or other things move around in the scene?
Martin.

It depends on the effect you want to create. I've seen some interesting HDR with waving grass creating some excellent colour effects.

Essentially, yes. For real HDR you need a tripod. HDR software handles movement between the frames differently for each package. In this respect Artizen is superb

You can tonemap (and create "pseudo HDR" when there's a shot that just couldn't have been multiple shots - like a "once in a lifetime" moment.

But in my book, a "real" HDR image shouldn't look like one It should just look like a well exposed photo

Matt

do the original images need to be shot in raw or could JPEG images be used for either psuedo or real?

You can use either but I see no reason to ever shoot JPG. Shoot RAW and stop fiddling with white balance etc., knowing you can change how you like in development, and that all your images carry the maximum amount of information possible.

Martin that is correct.

Itend to use a single shot with pictures with people in and 3/5 shots for others HDRs.

I would recommend this link to all who ar einterested in HDR.

http://stuckincustoms.com/2006/06/06/548/

If anyone is interested in my own application of HDR for photographing the interiors of marine caves then check out my project.

http://www.andymcinroy.com/5port.htm

I use Photomatix and blend between 3 and 7 exposures depending on how much contrast there is in the scene.

The project is actually featured in the latest issue of Pentax User Magazine.

That'll be the day.

G

George,

I expect that you've seen loads of good HDR images and have never known.

It's only the bad ones that stand out like a sore thumb. And there's plenty of bad photographs of all types.

What do you think about this one I took looking towards northern ireland's mighty prow of Fairhead?

I'm sure you are right. Just wish people would post those, instead of the ones you can tell from a mile away.

Yours looks fine to me. Love the slow shutter speed.

G

Can anyone tell me if there are any good help guides that outline what the various controls do when tone mapping. It,s OK just playing with them but many seem to do similar things and leave me a little perplexed. It would be good to get a good understanding of what I am actually changing and why. what are the differences between Details enhancer and tone compressor in photomatix etc.. thanks

Did you download the pdf guide from HDR soft?

You can find it here. Read it first and see if it helps. If not post a new question.

http://dl5.filekicker.net/private/$adv-rgn2$1215804387$1dfe5fe0ab9fd836e02592f29c860952$/id/$FK46447$196889-7256$/cache/1251160eaae6eff79ad4def929cf983487bfb3ce5eac3730648ffabee731f9e288adb1cd7d8ac2834ace5699ba2e03025e2086903c3d/ManualPhotomatixPro3Win.pdf

This looks like a great program and we had a demo of it at ADAPS last night. A group of us are ordering licences, so the price does come down.

I don't really go for "HDR with everything" but there are certainly some images where it really makes a difference.