Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
PS CS3 And HDR
- Thread starter IscariotJ
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Photoshop CS2 also has HDR natively!
Plus you can make HDR images yourself within PS with a lot more flexibility then those programs offer.
I say use HDR programs and plugins for creating series of HDR, but when you really want a shot to be exactly how you imaging it, make it yourself.
Plus you can make HDR images yourself within PS with a lot more flexibility then those programs offer.
I say use HDR programs and plugins for creating series of HDR, but when you really want a shot to be exactly how you imaging it, make it yourself.
Except the photoshop tonemapping options are quite limited. Atleast in CS2. I'm holding off buying photomatix to see how cs3 is.
This is cool. But needs to be able to tone map to 16 bit instead of only 8. As it is, it's behind the times (both Photomatix and Photoshop let you tone map down to 16 bits).
While this is true, qtpfsgui allows use of ashkimin, drago, durand, fattal, pattanik, reinhard02, and reinhard04 settings, all with lots of available customizations. While 16 bit TIFF (or even 8 bit TIFF) would be nice, it should be remembered that this is an opensource project. I'm sure some TIFF libs would be easily linked to in source and will be integrated in binaries soon. Until then, I certainly enjoy this great tool.
I actually talked to the developer about this and since it uses another program for the tone-mapping there's nothing that he can do about it. I agree it should be a simple fix but as of now there's no plan to do it and so it becomes useless for me. Otherwise it would be awesome since it has so many different tone-mapping algorithms.
Yeah, it has since CS2. My concern with photoshops HDR handling is its tonemapping operator is pretty difficult to get anything nice. Have they added more options for tone-mapping?
I've been using CS3 beta for a while now, but I don't recall any difference between HDR processing in CS2 and CS3. This could change in the final release, but I doubt it. I could be forgetting some changes, but in use there's nothing noticeable. PS makes more natural looking composites in which it's your job to adjust the tone curve when tone mapping down to 8/16 bits, but photomatix has its place in my opinion. The 'details enhancer' tone mapping function is obviously the best choice for really wacky HDR effects, but the other tone mapping option, compressor or something similar, offers more natural effects. There's still quite a bit of room to adjust the image in my opinion, and further adjustments can always be made in PS.
If you're having trouble with PS HDR, I found this PS specific tutorial to be the most helpful, although really the only hint I needed was that you need to downsample the resulting 32bit image by selecting 16 or 8 bits in the image menu to get tone mapping options, then use the 'local adaptation' option to make the curve fit the histogram.
I use both programs (i don't use the plugin since they just barely put out a beta for cs3) regularly, so you might as well keep both tools in your arsenal.
If you're having trouble with PS HDR, I found this PS specific tutorial to be the most helpful, although really the only hint I needed was that you need to downsample the resulting 32bit image by selecting 16 or 8 bits in the image menu to get tone mapping options, then use the 'local adaptation' option to make the curve fit the histogram.
I use both programs (i don't use the plugin since they just barely put out a beta for cs3) regularly, so you might as well keep both tools in your arsenal.