HDR Photography

[FabiolaChB]

:stare:

[redsmas]

You take one image and use that if it is in raw format.

[RandomClickRecord]

i find it cool and informative,

if you get chance have a look at my video "randomClickRecord-1" its cool

thanks

[imageediting902]

Yantram Image Editing Studio provide, if cherished photo has been damaged, torn by accident or simply and deteriorated through age. We can repair Photo Restoration services

Yantram Image Editing Studio, offers HDR Photography, High Dynamic Range Imaging from graphic designer the photo editing services.

[zenoist2]

hdr can look good if you dont go mad on it.

Theres an awful lot of hdr photos overdone.

the main prob you get in a photo is that the sky exposure is totally different from the land exposure.

HDR is cool if its done well.

[sandmancan2]

All of the information about HDR Photography, provided on the internet, has been intended to assist and teach "Photographers" how to do this process. While it's easy to teach people the shooting aspect, it's time consuming and expensive to learn how to do the proper post-processing. If you look up Pro Photo Results / HDR Photography on YouTube, you will finally be able to get the finished post-processing done for you! You do not need to be a professional Photographer to accomplish this.

[timetoparty11]

do you ever just do the HDR post processing in photoshop CS5 or something? If I have CS5, do I need photomatix?

[philritter21]

Unfortunately, "HDR" photography has been negatively stigmatized for me by all the doucher amateurs who get a program like Photomatix and fuck with the tone mapping and contrast/saturation sliders on their crappy picture until they get what looks like someone barfed up a carton's worth of partially digested sidewalk chalk all over it. They then proceed to post said intestinal bile onto flickr where other douchers leave comments praising and jacking off their "skills" thus continuing the cycle.

[MrAkihiros]

@philritter21 just need your opinion on this - how did ansel adams et al achieve such magnificent fotos that predate HDR? Now its like dime-a-dozen.

[AbrahamCollins]

@MrAkihiros The possibility of A.A. using HDR isn't 100% ruled out. George Lucas and ILM, for example, masked out portions of film-frames (sometimes thousands compounded per final frame) effectively to achieve special effects that blew the tops of every viewer's skull completely off, cinema expert or not.

For all we know Ansel could have done specifically masked triple (or more) exposures on the same plate in the field: he took his secrets to his grave!

[MrAkihiros]

@AbrahamCollins Thanks for the info and btw, well said.

[snowboardbum]

HDR's are for amateurs. If you want a properly exposed image then use a ND or graduated filter. Or even look up "black card" photography. HDR's just look to photoshopy and take the viewers eyes off the real meaning of the photograph. Instead, they're in awe off all the colors.

[dude2106]

@snowboardbum Tell that to the professional HDR photographers.

ND filters and black cards are all very well, but sometimes it is not the sky vs the ground that is hard to get. It can be different objects in the frame that don't get properly exposed when the rest does and vice versa. In those situations an ND filter or a blackcard wont do it.

I am not a fan of HDR either, but saying that it is amateur'ish is not correct. Because some people do it for a living.

[snowboardbum]

@dude2106 Yeaaaaa...I'm not the only photographer that doesn't like HDR because they look too digital. Most "pros" if not all use nd filters or nd grad filters. Google.

[AbrahamCollins]

@snowboardbum No ND grad filter can be smart about a mountain (let alone any non-landscape subject) poking over your horizon and mask it out; HDR is the answer until digital sensors and film begin to approach the incredible dynamic range of the human retina.

Slap any polarization filter on your lens and the problem is amplified, the need for HDR even more evident.

[snowboardbum]

@AbrahamCollins Yea...uh...what? First sentence doesn't even make sense. HDR is bullshit and it looks to digital. What do you think ansel adams did back in the day with no HDR capabilities? It's useless and every single pro I talk to that makes a living off of photography admits that they dislike HDR if not hate it. Do a quick google search and you will see for yourself OR better yet, go talk to some local pro's in your area.

All emotions aside, HDR blows.

[HeatherKearns1]

HDR images seem strange because we are used to seeing weak images exposed within the narrow range of most film and digital cameras. Try an experiment. Hold a HDR image ( properly developed ) up to a scene you have recently exposed. You will find the HDR image matches what the eye sees quite closely - much more closely a single exposure of the same scene.

[aleksandersandstrom]

I HATE HDR!

[SalPedi]

I certainly don't want to burst anyone's ballon, but, I've seen simply "SUPERB" HDR photos that were NOT RAW format, and they stopped me cold when I saw that they were all NON

RAW format photos.

But, YES, for the Pro or the perfectionist, shooting HDR in RAW is just fine, but don't be mislead into believing that in order to get great HDR results, you've gotta shoot RAW..

I don't shoot RAW and I was almost not getting into HDR because of that hinderance.

I learn otherwise!...

[thecommercialedge]

hdr makes my eyes bleed. :-D

[3deefilm]

HDR -- The best way to shoot high-quality HDR photography and video with DSLR cameras is the 3D-BS MINI (beam-splitter) Rig. To find out more visit our site - 3D Film Factory (dot) com

Canon 5D, 7D, Nikon D40, D50

[digitalazia]

@UserUnknown77 : Best thing is to convert your RAW to TIFF (16 bit) then merge them in Photomatix, the results sometimes are really wonderful and you can export to TIFF (16 bit) maintaining all the details you require. But I think best way of blending is using PS with masking/channels techniques

[kvnyng]

How do you get 3 different exposures if the subject moves a little bit lik the water

[Made4DBZ33]

@kvnyng you can select one of your images to be the base image for the "moving objects" .. this will also help with ghosting. Another less HDR way of doing it is to take 1 raw (so you don't have the problem with movement to begin with) make duplicates of it at different exposures (you can use photoshop for that) and then merge them in Photomatix as HDR. Hope that helps... I am prob the worst person at explaining stuff.

[nullquible90]

Very informative for a newbie like me. I also get some good pointers from thephotographyclinic (.) com

[WynnonaXandra]

holiday dating site # lushfmlk.info #

[Purdyc12393]

you should bracket plus and minus 2 stops for an even better dynamic range

[MrAkihiros]

@Purdyc12393 other tutorials say you should bracket with the shutter speed and not the f-stops. Which is better or correct?

[ElliottChess3x]

@MrAkihiros both wrong. you bracket your exposure comp setting.

[Sdfrien]

@MrAkihiros If you do not have exposure compensation settings then you will want to use your shutter speed. F-stops will change your depth of field which will result in completely different focused photos.

[MrAkihiros]

@Sdfrien Thanks.

[sebicu007]

photomatix pro is not a mackintosh program

[RosstheLoner]

@sebicu007 you are correct, photomatix pro is also a Windows program, but I do believe he was stating that he did his using the program on the Mac. I also did a video on this subject.

[sebicu007]

@RosstheLoner i know it`s working also on windows but i didn't know that it was used on mack.now i got the idea. my english is bad that`s why i should have read twice the text.please visit my hdr short film also youtube.com/watch?v=qGFjzSVO3Q­8

[JimTBell]

Anrei89. Another point to realise is the limitations of the recording medium. Film has its limitations and so do digital cameras. I just wish Photoshop had been around when I first started. To get the effect that is shown here in the hand printing days you would shade and burn in the areas concerned in the darkroom. So don't knock it.

[JimTBell]

Andrei89. Firstly cameras are only a tool for getting images. Using photoshop is no different from adding filters to the lens for an effect. Soft focus lenses, artificial light and spotting negs and prints are all part of the arsenal for good images. Throughout my forty five years I have used all the tools available in my photographic career. The important thing is the final image. How you get there doesn't matter. The talent is knowing how to use the tools available.

[HelloNewYorkCity]

make sure nothing moves, or you get some really crappy results. hdr is for like landscape to capture all the detail

[BeeFan247]

very nicely explained...

[zein2212]

Thanks

[jstrings00]

Great video. If anyone is interested in seeing amateur photography check out my photography video, please let me know what u think!

[MassAppealTV]

Great video, especially for those who are just discovering HDR Photography! Having just discovered it myself, I decided to blog on the subject. Search Mass Appeal HDR Photography on google. There are write ups on some of the best HDR photographers out there right now, like Trey Ratcliff and Terry Reinert!

[PaganDave1974]

Good information! I love HDR, brings out the detail much better in photos; i would highly recommend experimenting using HDR. I hope you don't mind me posting a video response showing my landscape HDR?

[mrjeff316]

even i would like to say the same , really very helpful information.. thanks a lot..

[TheBaconroll]

Photoshop has HDR capability.

[andrei89]

@TheBaconroll A real photographer doesn't need photoshop to make a good picture, that's where the real talent is (;

[newcoyote]

@andrei89 Words from a very naive individual and someone who almost certainly does not possess the skills implied.

[DRCsyntax]

@newcoyote I have to agree with you. 100% of photographers do post processing of some type, including film photographers.

[oooohblondiexo]

@DRCsyntax Because camera's don't always give you the true color of the scene, so post processing is necessary to get those vibrant colors into the photo.

[TheBaconroll]

You can't. The reason is that all subject matter in the images have to be stationary. Any movement will show. Eg; If you were taking three or five shots of different exposures from under to overexposed parts of the subject would be in a different place. You could try to use the bracketing tool in the camera on a highish speed and see if that works.

[AmateurPhotography]

Thanks for the info)

[Tortuga699]

@ExtremeFiZZ usualy with moving object we do a pseudo HDR with only one raw file, you can use Photomatix pro to open the file & generate a pseudo HDR. Otherwise you will get blur image or ghost effect from person walking or whatever is moving, sry for my english.

[Av3rnus]

you must take a RAW(CR2 format) photo and boost the shadows int he image.

[vladvalentinov]

This will work only in limited cases. Imagine you have to capture the image of the white car and what is under the car in the same shot. RAW will not do that. RAW has great color depth but not dinamic range.

[arb07d]

Really great information! Follow me on twitter @alisonbadely to keep up with my work and get tips on other photographers too!

p.s. Im a PC ;)