Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography - post your HDR

How are you guys taking these shots with moving subjects like the puppy and the fire?

I'm using a D60 and have to manually change the exposure for it to work. And since I have to do that there would be movement in the frame.

PS I'm just starting and just got my camera last week.

Zack
 
Taken in St. Louis, MO at Forest Park just last week:

art-hill-forest-park-hdr.jpg
 
Was having a little fun at the cider mill by my house...

Rusted Wheel
386431938_wheoP-L.jpg



Old Tractor
391604903_mM6Pk-L.jpg



It's that time of year!
386970213_98CLG-L.jpg
 
CarlsonCustoms said:
How are you guys taking these shots with moving subjects like the puppy and the fire?

I'm using a D60 and have to manually change the exposure for it to work. And since I have to do that there would be movement in the frame.

PS I'm just starting and just got my camera last week.

Zack
Click to expand...

when shooting moving objects/people it would be better to shoot RAW and then manipulate that one in Photomatix or first get a few differently exposed JPEGs from that using Lightroom, if I'm not mistaking
 
svndmvn said:
when shooting moving objects/people it would be better to shoot RAW and then manipulate that one in Photomatix or first get a few differently exposed JPEGs from that using Lightroom, if I'm not mistaking
Click to expand...

Correct! Shoot one RAW, then manipulate it (I use multiple versions in Aperture then export… but if there's a way to do that inside of Photomatix that'd be tons easier) to provide yourself several bracketed negatives.

Shooting one RAW isn't better than shooting, say, 3 and doing that, but it's the only way to stop motion (side note: keep in mind that oceans move too).
 
termina3 said:
Correct! Shoot one RAW, then manipulate it (I use multiple versions in Aperture then export… but if there's a way to do that inside of Photomatix that'd be tons easier) to provide yourself several bracketed negatives.

Shooting one RAW isn't better than shooting, say, 3 and doing that, but it's the only way to stop motion (side note: keep in mind that oceans move too).
Click to expand...

Of course there is a way to use one RAW in Photomatix.

Open Photomatix.
Go to File/Open and open your RAW image file.
It'll open it and say "Your RAW file has been converted into a pseudo-HDR image."
Click on Tone Mapping and proceed normally.
 
I am now poor, and my old digital camera has passed on. (won't write to / read cards anymore - any of them) So - recommend me an DSLR that will support bracketing - preferably automatic so I don't need a remote switch and tripod each time. (one that will take 2 or 3 exposures by itself)

One that uses SD cards would be a major plus, as that what I've got currently. (many, many of them).

Is this possible for $500 USD +/- 100?
 
Big-TDI-Guy said:
I am now poor, and my old digital camera has passed on. (won't write to / read cards anymore - any of them) So - recommend me an DSLR that will support bracketing - preferably automatic so I don't need a remote switch and tripod each time. (one that will take 2 or 3 exposures by itself)

One that uses SD cards would be a major plus, as that what I've got currently. (many, many of them).

Is this possible for $500 USD +/- 100?
Click to expand...

http://hdr-photography.com/aeb.html
I believe that is the feature you're looking for..I'd suggest looking for a cheap Nikon D80
 
termina3 said:
Are you using effects other than HDR?
Click to expand...
Yes, Gaussian Blur, some different layer modes and dodging and burning for highlights. Ive prob played with channels and layer modes for hours in photoshop to get the pictures to look the way I wanted.
 
gnd said:
Of course there is a way to use one RAW in Photomatix.

Open Photomatix.
Go to File/Open and open your RAW image file.
It'll open it and say "Your RAW file has been converted into a pseudo-HDR image."
Click on Tone Mapping and proceed normally.
Click to expand...

This works, 100%.

However, I have had better results taking the initial RAW and doing -2, 0, and +2 EV TIFFs in Lightroom and then using those to produce the pseudo-HDR in Photomatix. Can't put my finger on what it is, but I prefer the results from this method vs. using the RAW directly.
 
Edge100 said:
This is beautiful PP, and a good composition...except for the horizon. It's not straight, but it's also not tilted enough to be "arty".

Otherwise, a very nice shot. I LOVE clouds in HDRs.
Click to expand...

Thanks... I wasn't going for a perfect shot, I was just playing with my new fisheye.
 
Edge100 said:
This is beautiful PP, and a good composition...except for the horizon. It's not straight, but it's also not tilted enough to be "arty".

Otherwise, a very nice shot. I LOVE clouds in HDRs.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I hate how people think there are 'rules' to photography. There aren't. There are in fact general guidelines, but those can be broken. I think this picture is a good example of this. It works because the horse appears straight and balanced even though the horizon is not.
 
TuffLuffJimmy said:
I disagree. I hate how people think there are 'rules' to photography. There aren't. There are in fact general guidelines, but those can be broken. I think this picture is a good example of this. It works because the horse appears straight and balanced even though the horizon is not.
Click to expand...

The tilted horizon is distracting and annoying to the eye. It isn't pleasing.

How much simpler does it get? Unless you're making a statement, why punish the viewer?
 
termina3 said:
The tilted horizon is distracting and annoying to the eye. It isn't pleasing.

How much simpler does it get? Unless you're making a statement, why punish the viewer?
Click to expand...

'the eye'? How has Sauron been lately?

In all seriousness. It's an opinion, not concrete fact. Next you'll come with "but it's the majority's opinion!" To that I reply, "You've already voiced your opinion that you hate HDR, so then it's a bad picture already. Why complain about the horizon? Perhaps he is not trying to cater to the majority, maybe he made the image for others, like himself, who do not mind a crooked horizon."
 
Don't mean to be too much of an a$$ but I find most of those pictures would have been MUCH better with much less post-processing.

In my own opinion, a good HDR picture is not one were the effect is obvious at the first second looking at it.
 
TuffLuffJimmy said:
I disagree. I hate how people think there are 'rules' to photography. There aren't. There are in fact general guidelines, but those can be broken. I think this picture is a good example of this. It works because the horse appears straight and balanced even though the horizon is not.
Click to expand...

There are no rules. Do whatever you like.

I don't like crooked horizons, unless they are so crooked that the effect looks intentional. This one just looks sloppy, and that, in my opinion, makes an otherwise very nice photo (as I mentioned) slightly less appealing than it would otherwise be.

EDIT: And, to be honest, the horse isn't straight. He's clearly walking up hill.
 
Edge100 said:
There are no rules. Do whatever you like.

I don't like crooked horizons, unless they are so crooked that the effect looks intentional. This one just looks sloppy, and that, in my opinion, makes an otherwise very nice photo (as I mentioned) slightly less appealing than it would otherwise be.

EDIT: And, to be honest, the horse isn't straight. He's clearly walking up hill.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, horizons must always be level unless it is over angled, then you know its intentional. I can never get mine lined up so I use align tools :D
 
digitalfrog said:
Don't mean to be too much of an a$$ but I find most of those pictures would have been MUCH better with much less post-processing.

In my own opinion, a good HDR picture is not one were the effect is obvious at the first second looking at it.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. Most of these are starting to look too fake for my taste.
 
some may like it, some may hate it, it's all good, i myself love the "plastic/fake" effect i was able to get here...

2989958022_2f8eed64fe.jpg
 
juanster said:
some may like it, some may hate it, it's all good, i myself love the "plastic/fake" effect i was able to get here...

2989958022_2f8eed64fe.jpg
Click to expand...

It's a heavy PP, no doubt, but it's nice PP. You clearly weren't going for 'realistic', and that's fine.

It amazes me that people would open a thread entitled "HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography - post your HDR", look at all the HDR photos, and then complain that they don't like HDR photography. What did you expect to see here???

No question that HDR can get to be a bit much sometimes. But it's a PP style, like any other. To me, saying "I don't like HDR" is like saying "I don't like dodging and burning"; sometimes HDR is called for, sometimes it isn't, and sometimes you do it anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back