Stained glass windows and HDR

No, the window is way too dull. Mr B's version is much better, but like he says the window needs deeper blacks whilst retaining the brightness.

Unless you are going for a dark surround a la David trout () where I agree 1 exposure would be enough ) then my solution of 2 exposures will work the best.

Google image stained glass window, there's plenty of examples of how the window itself should optimally look

With 2 exposures you can set the white point and black point of the both exposures optimally before overlaying the correctly exposed and adjusted window

NO! This is worse than all the others!
As Smeggy says, keep it simple.

David is right, the window is the picture, not the stonework, but if you must include it....in camera HDR (lowest setting) seems to work fairly well in my experience, at least on the K5 it does

In fear of incurring the wrath of others, I do wish people would understand these terms before they bandy them above.

HDR is any a process used to expand the normal dynamic range beyond that of the cameras ability to capture it all in a single image.

Taking two exposures and bleeding them together (by any method) produces a HDR image.

Like it or not

Trying my best to go with the "keep it simple" theme (honest!!), this is as simple as it can get. It is a (cropped) default conversion in LR5.3 of the same single image taken at 0.5sec, with no added processing at all - so effectively, this is what an in-camera JPEG would have looked like.




So - better or worse? A starting point or as good as it gets and best left alone? Where would you take it?

I greatly appreciate your help with this, folks, and I'm determined to do the best I can with this image. You'll probably find this amusing, but I did put a 16x12 print of the first image in the thread in my camera club comp. It should be interesting to hear what the judge has to say about this (29 May).


Andrew

FWIW, this is the default output of a HDR produced by LR/Enfuse from the 0.5sec image and one three stops lighter (4sec).




I think HDR & LR/Enfuse just went on the back burner again. It doesn't seem to have anything to offer for this kind of image. I think now, for this kind of image, Smeggypants suggestion of using two images - one for the glass and the other for the stonework and then doing a cut and paste job might work best.


Andrew

These last two crops seem good to me. The vibrant colours are getting better compared to the earlier efforts. The very last post looks a bleached but the potential for rich saturation is there, it just needs a tweak on the slider in PS to bring down the highlights and enrich those lovely reds and blues. Does the image need a little PP sharpening? I think it does.
David

PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

I am coming to think that the advantage of the Smeggypants cut & paste using two images approach, is that you have full control of the output - which isn't the case if you use HDR software (even the simple LR/Enfuse plugin in Lightroom).


Andrew

The cropped default view looks the most believable. I would just shoot JPEG to begin with, once the defaults for that have been set up to your taste. Shoot RAW as well by all means until you are satisfied that you're not losing something.

I still find very few instances where a RAW capture is actually necessary.

Yep, I did try that. No matter what I do, it leaves the large blue area in the left hand pane looking purple.

Andrew

Any blend-type approach has its pitfalls, and in this instance no amount of layer masking / selections or other separating wizardry stands any chance of 'keeping it simple'. Your 'keep it simple' version above has the stone window frame dark (ie based more on the exterior exposure). This is where any selections / masking become tricky - in reality there will be a natural blend / bleed of light values from the window onto the frame materials, merging gradually towards the lower light levels of the interior. It does not just jump from bright on the glass to dark on the stone window-frame - that is what a selection-type approach gives you.

To try and reproduce this natural effect by selections / mask opacity settings / selection feathering is a futile exercise. Better to take advantage of the HDR processing's natural take on this. Your HDR original has the correct light bleed / blend between the different zones - that is what the technique is designed to do. It worked well.

You just need to take the single HDR output file and do a few tidying up tweaks - white balance a bit, give the white-point a nudge up and some sharpening.

I would take any comments about it being an easy job with blending with a pinch of salt - until someone can actually demonstrate it with some delicacy.

Nigel - I agree with what you say, to an extent, about making selections and masking not being so simple. It would only be worth it if I regarded the stonework as being an important element of the photo. In a club comp, it's likely that the image would be marked down if the stonework was completely black with no detail.

Bearing that in mind, I have here just taken the single image (0.5sec exp) and lifted the shadows and blacks in Lightroom & added some sharpening.




and a 100% crop ..........




I'm not sure I can do much better with a single image. FWIW, I definitely prefer it to the first image in the thread. I remain unconvinced of the benefits of HDR software.

Andrew

Just be more confident in what you've done! Don't let the HDR naysayers blur your judgements.... your original is far superior in tone and texture, as well as reproducing a realistic rendering. You said there was interior tungsten lighting which lit the inside - this lighting is there on your original, now its been killed off. It was only the high Tungsten tone that I questioned, as the eye would naturally balance this with more cool tones from outside.

Nigel, this is a crop from the first HDR image at the start of the thread.




You don't really think that's better than the crop from the single image immediately above, do you?

Andrew

I'd say the light and colour bleeding between the glass and stonework is better, more realistic, as is the exposure on the stonework. Why would the bright light through the glass suddenly drop so much once it hits the stone edge? t wouldn't, it would brighten the stone frame considerably, as in your HDR.

The glass does look rougher, granted, but you've been spending a lot of effort on the single shots, and mainly optimizing the glass at the expense of the interior, which you've just let go.

The HDR just needs a another run, a bit more care on the brighter tones. I don't know the process you're using so can't offer any advice there.

Nope, just the reverse. As I said of the last image, all I've done is lift the shadows & blacks so that the stone isn't completely black - and sharpen a bit. Other than that, it's exactly as a JPEG out of camera would have been.

In my book, the crop from the original HDR is ....... awful. I can't believe that I put that image into a photo club comp.

Andrew