As I have just posted about the best I can do by merging two images - and Nigel is going to post his best stab at an HDR version, maybe I should post my best attempt at processing just a single image in Lightroom. This would have been my default way of processing this image, before I started faffing around with LR/Enfuse & HDR.




I selected all the stonework in Lightroom using an adjustment brush, increased the exposure by a stop or so, lifted the shadows some more and shifted the colour balance to look more "stone-like" (It was way too yellow) - but I didn't try to match the colour balance of the stone in the "two image" version on the previous page.

Go for it, Nigel!!

Andrew

Nigel, I think John was right. The stonework is still too light. This crop looks a bit more realistic, I think.




FWIW, I have had a number of further attempts at using HDR (LR/Enfuse) with several RAWs and whilst I can produce an image that is much better than the first in this thread, I don't think I can match this one.

Best of luck with Photomatix.

Andrew

Yes, possibly a little.

Where did that come from? Many folks find Lightroom to be adequate for 98% of their needs. I doubt that you can say that of any other photo editing software.

Andrew

The best result I have seen so far is the one I have just posted above. From a practical point of view, I had to do the layering & masking in PSE8, as it's not do-able in Lightroom. This is a bit of a disapppoinment, as I had hoped to use Lightroom exclusively. LR/Enfuse gave me a chance of doing that, which is why I tried blending the images in that originally. Having said that, I think I must use the techniques that I think are likely to give me the best results - at the moment, that isn't HDR.

Best of luck with Photomatix.

Andrew

This is the final version of that image. I've just cleaned up the mask a bit .....




.... and a closer crop, so that Nigel can search for brush marks.

NOTE: The change in brightness part way up the left hand mullion is a joint in the stonework. It really looks like that. I guess the window must have been repaired at some time in the last century or two. There are several bits of the stonework that are worn/damaged which shouldn't be mistaken for brushwork - Nigel will be able to see those in the RAWs I've shared with him.




I think it's quite a bit better than the HDR version.

Andrew

Interesting stuff. I like those!

Andrew

My intention was to try and get the stonework and glass looking as it might to a person in the church. I hadn't photographed stained glass before, so took 8 images, each separated by a stop - in the hope that one way or another I would be able to generate a "realistic" looking image.

My last attempt, using the technique you suggested ( in PSE8 ) is getting there. It was really quite dark in that corner of the church, the only lighting being overspill from tungsten lighting in the nave and from an open door about 20-25ft to the right of the window - so the stonework is probably still a bit lighter than it should be.

My inclination would have been to try using just one exposure (the one that just avoided clipping highlights) or to do a copy/paste with two images if that didn't work out so well. I have no real excuse for using HDR for the first image, other than that I wanted to try out LR/Enfuse in Lightroom. My bottom line conclusion here, I think, is that HDR might be useful in some circumstances (not sure exactly which), but for me it's definitely a technique of last resort.

Thanks for your help with this.

Andrew

Ta.

'Twas the technique you suggested.

Andrew

Yes, there are a few telltale signs - but it was a rough and ready attempt. If it had been intended as a "finished product", you would not have been able to tell (so easily).

I have given you access to a Google drive folder "nigel" and dropped some RAWs into it - so, feel free to use Photomatix or whatever you like. If anyone else wants access, just drop me a PM with your email address in it and I'll add you to the share.

So, Nigel, over to you - feel free to use HDR to produce a better version - or eat words as you choose.

Andrew