HYDRA: HDR Processing Software: (+) or (-)?

[marclapierre13]

I was reading a bit about it in macworld, and it looked pretty nice. Its $60 to buy, but it looks like it has a slicker interface than Photo matrix, which on the occasion I use HDR is the program Ill use.
Any opinions on Hydra?? Good, bad, better than photomatrix?

 

[onomatopoeia]

I think the consensus is that it's not really HDR. If I recall it only merges (blends) photos but doesn't have any tone mapping tools which is what really makes HDR work. I also don't think it offers RAW support.

 

[kitmos]

It doesn't offer Raw at this point but plans to add it later this year.

 

[Optimus Rhyme]

While I do prefer the interface of Hydra, I felt the program was very lacking. If it had the same features of Photomatix, I think I might like it more, but it's just a program that still needs some work. Keep an eye on it, but stick with Photomatix.

 

[marclapierre13]

Good to know. Ya, i definitely need tone mapping, thats basically what makes an HDR good lol, in my experience. Also, raw support is good as well...i think ill keep watching it, hope for some upgrades, before I spring for it.
Photomatrix does everything I really need for HDR, but the interface isnt all that spectacular.

 

[Optimus Rhyme]

Good to know. Ya, i definitely need tone mapping, thats basically what makes an HDR good lol, in my experience. Also, raw support is good as well...i think ill keep watching it, hope for some upgrades, before I spring for it.
Photomatrix does everything I really need for HDR, but the interface isnt all that spectacular.

While I agree the interface isn't spectacular, it does what it needs to. It's basic, but you really don't need it looking any different when it does exactly what you need.