Not Another HDR thread

[Joe King]

Here, try this:

Tree.zip

My attempt:

 

[G.T.]

Here, try this:

Tree.zip

Sorry link does not work is there another way for you to try this?

 

[Joe King]

Sorry link does not work is there another way for you to try this?

OK, try this link: http://drop.io/0cuemjz/asset/tree-zip#

(I've amended the link in the original post as well)

 

[FrankieTDouglas]

Please people, stop calling these images HDR when they're not. The final images posted in the this thread are tonemapped images NOT HDR.

Unless you're posting 32 bit images in an actual HDR format ie .exr or .hdr then please call them what they are, tonemapped images.

If you want to learn about HDR images you should grab a copy of this book:

http://www.hdrlabs.com/book/

Matt

This past summer, I worked with one of the leading photographers in the HDR category. He leads workshops nationwide on the topic and has published books concerning it. We even tone mapped images and still referred to them as HDR images.

So... yeah.

 

[G.T.]

OK, try this link: http://drop.io/0cuemjz/asset/tree-zip#

(I've amended the link in the original post as well)

Thanks, it worked, will post my version later.

 

[G.T.]

This is my attempt, please feel free to comment, I would love feedback.

 

[Joe King]

View attachment 166173

This is my attempt, please feel free to comment, I would love feedback.

It's pretty good. You've managed to make the sky more vibrant than I was able to achieve (I found a setting that brought up the sky but didn't like the colour cast on the vegetation; if I'd more time, I'd have rendered both versions and blended them in photoshop). There's something strange going on in the lower section of sky to the right of the tree where the image seems a bit blown out to me. Again, adjusting the HDR to fix and then blending might fix. (You're always going to have to do some tweaks in photoshop).

 

[G.T.]

It's pretty good. You've managed to make the sky more vibrant than I was able to achieve (I found a setting that brought up the sky but didn't like the colour cast on the vegetation; if I'd more time, I'd have rendered both versions and blended them in photoshop). There's something strange going on in the lower section of sky to the right of the tree where the image seems a bit blown out to me. Again, adjusting the HDR to fix and then blending might fix. (You're always going to have to do some tweaks in photoshop).

Thanks for your response I'll keep those points in mind.

 

[iBecks]

I would love ur opinions on these.

Picture 2, I then desaturated it and came up with this. I think this is my favorite version though I like 3 and 4 too.

View attachment 162032

This is a B&W version I did because others in this thread tried to do one for a different image that did not look to good. I think it was lacking contrast. This image, however, I think is better with contrast and suits B&W.
View attachment 162035

Nice HDR's

 

[G.T.]

Nice HDR's

Thanks.

 

[G.T.]

It's pretty good. You've managed to make the sky more vibrant than I was able to achieve (I found a setting that brought up the sky but didn't like the colour cast on the vegetation; if I'd more time, I'd have rendered both versions and blended them in photoshop). There's something strange going on in the lower section of sky to the right of the tree where the image seems a bit blown out to me. Again, adjusting the HDR to fix and then blending might fix. (You're always going to have to do some tweaks in photoshop).

Here is another attempt keeping in mind the bit near the tree that is "blown out"



Please feel free to comment.

 

[jons]

I'm not a huge fan of this type of HDR. It seems like another fad in photography like soft focus, selective color and vignettes.

I have seen HDR used very effectively in making scenes appear more realistic, which IMO is where it's strength lies.

 

[G.T.]

I'm not a huge fan of this type of HDR. It seems like another fad in photography like soft focus, selective color and vignettes.

I have seen HDR used very effectively in making scenes appear more realistic, which IMO is where it's strength lies.

I agree, HDR allows for more realistic scenes, however, its effects can also help make an image look amazing and dramatic. I do understand where your coming from though, sometime it is used to an extreme that the image can look a bit unrealistic or over the top.

Here are a few where it makes an image look amazing IMO.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregoryhughdavidson/1103684653/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/459418289/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ippop/2949358069/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9147703@N03/2176897085/

Here are a few that I think HDR helps look natural and allows more detail.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/New_York_City_at_night_HDR.jpg
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/401234/ Scroll to jrm27 #934
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeunejedi/598885132/

Finally, here are a couple that are a bit over the top.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuckincustoms/204476471/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jb1/2064975152/


Lastly this site has some nice examples http://webbyarts.com/30-attractive-hdr-pictures

 

[Joe King]

Here's another set to play with:

Leeson.zip

My attempt. This is done with some additional post production in Photoshop to straighten the image, remove blemishes and a slight crop.

C&C please.

 

[G.T.]

Here's another set to play with:

Leeson.zip

My attempt. This is done with some additional post production in Photoshop to straighten the image, remove blemishes and a slight crop.

C&C please.

I like it, I think u have done well removing blemishes etc. I am going to upload my version in a bit. I will try do one that looks as natural as possible and one... well we'll see.

 

[G.T.]

Here is one I have tried to keep as natural as possible for one of the previous posters jons.



Here is the Other.




I had to remove the blemishes too. I think one is dirt on lens and the other is because exposure is too high in the clouds for some the images, correct me if I'm wrong.

Please feel free to comment

 

[G.T.]

Anyone, feel free to comment lol.

 

[G.T.]

Not been a few post for awhile. Just wondered if anybody has any shots to share, I currently can't post any exposures for u to try but I will be able to in about 2 weeks. I will try have some then. Please feel free in the mean time to post some of ur own or just to comment and give advice on submitted images.

 

[iBecks]

Here is one I have tried to keep as natural as possible for one of the previous posters jons.

View attachment 166599

Here is the Other.

View attachment 166598


I had to remove the blemishes too. I think one is dirt on lens and the other is because exposure is too high in the clouds for some the images, correct me if I'm wrong.

Please feel free to comment

I think they could do with the images being straightened.

I have a few HDR's on my Flickr photoset, take a look at those for ideas.

I used Photomatix Pro and am happy to share some preset template files to show what different effects they have.

 

[G.T.]

I think they could do with the images being straightened.

I have a few HDR's on my Flickr photoset, take a look at those for ideas.

I used Photomatix Pro and am happy to share some preset template files to show what different effects they have.

Thanks that would be gr8. I agree they probably would look better straightened.

 

[G.T.]

Just wondered if anyone has something to upload, nothings really been happening te last few days. I have exams the next few days so can't get any of my own exposures to upload.

 

[designguy79]

nah, i think calling these images hdr is more convenient than saying tonemapped.
somehow it's like everyone says pencil-lead when in reality it's graphite and whatever else.

I know this is kinda old, but I just thought of an analogy to help people understand the difference between tone-mapped "HDR" photos and actual HDR images. (and I agree with the other guy, it *is* important to be accurate!)

Have you ever converted a color image to black and white (not gray scale, I mean exactly 2 "colors": black and white)? You get a lot of "dithering" -- the computer is using algorithms to decide how closely to put the dots together to retain as much of the image as possible.

When you create a tone-map of an HDR photo, you are converting an HDR to a 8 or 16-bit image so that it can be displayed on your computer. Photomatix lets you modify the algorithm used by adjusting the settings to your hearts content.

Saying that these JPGs are HDR is as inaccurate as stating a 2-color GIF is a full-color JPG. The main problem is that technological limits keep monitors form being able to display a *true* HDR photo.

In closing: if you want to be accurate and help clear up confusion on the subject, refer to it as a "HDR rendering" or "tonemapped HDR"

Thanks for reading, and I hope this was helpful to someone!