My First Attempt At HDR

[zkogut]

Zak: Your first attempt at high-dynamic range (HDR) imaging works for me. The increased luminosity provides the warmth of a timeless Christmas dream-like memory. The peek-a-poo view of the kitchen is essential to the scene. Good work.

Thank you. I agree and the reason I chose to keep these colors is because it gave me that Christmas feel.

[Loose Canon]

Anytime one composites an image it is always advantageous (and usually necessary) to process the contributing images separately (at least) in a good RAW converter before compositing. Matching many of the attributes (and color balance is a biggie) throughout the contributing images. In this case I would have started with a set of properly balanced images and once composited made my final balance tweaks. The better (and more correct) the images one starts with, the better the final composite is going to be and with more and better choices to get there. I just don’t think there is much room for argument there.

While I may find a warmer color (possibly) more asthetic, the original post has one wicked color cast. Add that to the super unreal blue cast of the view outside the windows and it starts to take on something other than a photographic appearance.

Now, if this is what you want that is cool. But I’m in agreement that a better work-flow to get there always serves better. Especially as one moves along in this and other generes.

Much the same way it makes all the difference in processing a color version of an image as close to perfection as you know how, in color, before converting to mono.

So my questions to Zak regarding the composite would be:
Did you see these color casts (yellow and blue)?
Did you process your contributing exposures at all and with an eye to color balance? Did you care about that?
If yes to the above question did you process this way purposely? And if yes and this was your choice and creation, then that is the end of the questions!
If no to the above question then do you think you would rather be in the driver’s seat and have the control/choices?

As far as what I would say other wise?

Zak I think your Mother’s dining room and table are gorgeous. I’m seeing more than one antique piece here. Very cool! A scene well worth capture for sure! I can smell the cooking from here and I’m betting the sit-down with Family was what memories are made of. Very warm and inviting looking and I would be okay if you told your Dear Mother this from me! There is a definite feeling of Family and Love here.

I also have to mention that I’m really digging the chandelier’s reflection on the ceiling!

[Loose Canon]

Thank you. I agree and the reason I chose to keep these colors is because it gave me that Christmas feel.

Welp, looks like we posted at about the same time Zak!

Please see the last two paragraphs of my post!

[ajohnw]

The yellow/tungsten lighting cast is one of the main reasons people like it Terry. It's easy to remove as Manfred's post shows but the shot becomes rather ordinary.

The muddiness I mentioned mostly on the walls and things hanging on it is down to the exposures used. It doesn't detract from the shot as it tends to concentrate attention on the table.

There is only one bad thing as I see it that was probably built into the result as soon as it was taken - perspective distortion. I don't think this adds to it at all. Camera height can be used to at least part correct that problem as can increased framing as correction will always loose some of the shot. Sometimes there isn't sufficient space to increase the frame. Fixing this and the blue cast out of the window doesn't really help the shot as the sideboard gets chopped off maybe loosing the balance that was provided by the door.



John
-

[JR1]

I always thing people over do HDR, when it really should be subtle

This looks more like a dreamscape, and funnily enough though I don't like it as HDR it is a very attractive image

[HaseebM]

..Endless variations in the output are possible from barely detectable to as far as some one wants to go. This sort of thing really needs another name.

John
-

I agree and guess the software developers too agree as they tend to name it as 'grunge' or 'painterly' and such. I find in Photomatix they have a preset called 'Photographic'.

[FrankMi]

Hi Zak, congratulations on taking the plunge into HDR processing. It has a lot to offer, particularly for indoor scenes where dynamic exposure range from indoor shadows to outdoor highlights is this wide.

You are requesting our thoughts on how to improve this image and I will assume you are referring to the HDR processing technique and not composition or other photographic aspects of the image. So, if you are looking to improve the processing technique, we should start at the beginning.

How many bracketed shots were used and what was their EV spacing? Most HDR scenes would use -2EV, 0EV and +2EV but I have found that this type of scene in particular is best captured with a 5 EV spread as in -4EV, -2EV, 0EV, +2EV and +4EV but fine tuning those starting points requires seeing the histograms.

Usually, before the shutter is pressed, there is a final result in mind that dictates how the image is captured with the post processing techniques in mind to achieve that 'look'. Perhaps you are not at that stage as yet but as you prepare to hopefully reshoot the scene, you'll want to be thinking about how this result compares to your goal for the look of the final image and what you might do differently.

If this is the look you wanted for this image then you have achieved your goal. If not, then please let us know what you feel needs to changed to move the image in the direction you want to take?

Usually, the tonemapping of an HDR image is the first step in post processing and there are a number of tonemaping quirks that need to be adjusted to specific elements in the image. Correcting these quirks requires either layers and masks or skills in using adjustment brushes.

Can you tell us a bit about how you processed the set? What software, settings/presets, and options were used? Of particular interest would be how you set the white balance for different parts of the scene that are affected by the various lighting sources involved.

Other's have commented on the image so I will note only a couple of things that I didn't see mentioned. One of the quirks of tonemapping is the tendency for foliage to take on an 'electric' green look. This can be corrected by blending in the foliage from the image that has the foliage properly exposed. Don't forget the foliage reflections when you make this adjustment. Another guess that one would expect is that the woodwork is either white or antique white but here it appears to be a muddy brown.

Although not great by any means, my view of an HDR image like this would have a look more like the following.



Sorry about the perspective distortion. Correcting for that would have lost too much of the image. Camera limitations in capturing what is seen can be very annoying at times!

Hope this helps!

[zkogut]

Hi Zak, congratulations on taking the plunge into HDR processing. It has a lot to offer, particularly for indoor scenes where dynamic exposure range from indoor shadows to outdoor highlights is this wide.

You are requesting our thoughts on how to improve this image and I will assume you are referring to the HDR processing technique and not composition or other photographic aspects of the image. So, if you are looking to improve the processing technique, we should start at the beginning.

How many bracketed shots were used and what was their EV spacing? Most HDR scenes would use -2EV, 0EV and +2EV but I have found that this type of scene in particular is best captured with a 5 EV spread as in -4EV, -2EV, 0EV, +2EV and +4EV but fine tuning those starting points requires seeing the histograms.

Usually, before the shutter is pressed, there is a final result in mind that dictates how the image is captured with the post processing techniques in mind to achieve that 'look'. Perhaps you are not at that stage as yet but as you prepare to hopefully reshoot the scene, you'll want to be thinking about how this result compares to your goal for the look of the final image and what you might do differently.

If this is the look you wanted for this image then you have achieved your goal. If not, then please let us know what you feel needs to changed to move the image in the direction you want to take?

Usually, the tonemapping of an HDR image is the first step in post processing and there are a number of tonemaping quirks that need to be adjusted to specific elements in the image. Correcting these quirks requires either layers and masks or skills in using adjustment brushes.

Can you tell us a bit about how you processed the set? What software, settings/presets, and options were used? Of particular interest would be how you set the white balance for different parts of the scene that are affected by the various lighting sources involved.

Other's have commented on the image so I will note only a couple of things that I didn't see mentioned. One of the quirks of tonemapping is the tendency for foliage to take on an 'electric' green look. This can be corrected by blending in the foliage from the image that has the foliage properly exposed. Don't forget the foliage reflections when you make this adjustment. Another guess that one would expect is that the woodwork is either white or antique white but here it appears to be a muddy brown.

Although not great by any means, my view of an HDR image like this would have a look more like the following.



Sorry about the perspective distortion. Correcting for that would have lost too much of the image. Camera limitations in capturing what is seen can be very annoying at times!

Hope this helps!

Hi FrankMi,

I used Photoshop CS6 and HDR Pro within photoshop to process this HDR shot. I used 5 pictures from f/4.0 to f/8.0 or so...I never thought of using exposure compensation to make the photo brackets light to dark. I only used aperture to achieve the different lighting with the white balance set to "flash" even though I didn't use a flash. I wish I had noticed the green backyard and how vibrant it became while I was tonemapping. I would have masked it out. I just played with the sliders until I got the look I wanted. Like I mentioned, I'm very new to HDR processing. Thanks for the tips everyone! Keep them coming!

[Loose Canon]

One thing I would mention right off is that you do your bracketing at a constant aperture so you don't have differing DoF's (possible focus issues) to deal with when you composite.

[FrankMi]

One thing I would mention right off is that you do your bracketing at a constant aperture so you don't have differing DoF's (possible focus issues) to deal with when you composite.

Zak, I absolutely agree with Terry on Aperture Priority for either focus or exposure bracketing. Any merging of images pretty much requires a stationary subject so it is far more practical to vary the shutter speed to change the EV.

Having the White Balance set to Flash, then shooting with a combination of likely tungsten and possible florescent inside and daylight outside makes for a very difficult White Balance to correct. I would set the White Balance to either Auto or the light source of the largest area being lit. Either way, multiple light sources means that some object specific White Balancing would need to be done if you want the scene to come close to matching reality.

You also have the option in CS6 of merging images without tonemapping. In some cases this produces a much more realistic result as it avoids correcting for the tonemapping quirks. For example, applying tonemapping produces really weird skin tones so if there are folks in the image and you tonemap, similar to foliage issues, you'll need to blend back in the skin tones from the original image.

Tonemapping also tends to produce some really noticeable halos at the horizon when used for landscapes that would need to be corrected. I still tonemap HDR images but in most cases there is much merging work to be done. My goal is to get the images as close to reality as possible which means that if you can tell it was processed with HDR techniques then I've failed.

[zkogut]

One thing I would mention right off is that you do your bracketing at a constant aperture so you don't have differing DoF's (possible focus issues) to deal with when you composite.

Thanks for the tip. I always thought that HDR was done with the aperture being adjusted not the shutter speed. Your way makes more sense though. I'll definitely try that out on my next HDR shot using EV instead of changing aperture. Thanks!

[zkogut]

Zak, I absolutely agree with Terry on Aperture Priority for either focus or exposure bracketing. Any merging of images pretty much requires a stationary subject so it is far more practical to vary the shutter speed to change the EV.

Having the White Balance set to Flash, then shooting with a combination of likely tungsten and possible florescent inside and daylight outside makes for a very difficult White Balance to correct. I would set the White Balance to either Auto or the light source of the largest area being lit. Either way, multiple light sources means that some object specific White Balancing would need to be done if you want the scene to come close to matching reality.

You also have the option in CS6 of merging images without tonemapping. In some cases this produces a much more realistic result as it avoids correcting for the tonemapping quirks. For example, applying tonemapping produces really weird skin tones so if there are folks in the image and you tonemap, similar to foliage issues, you'll need to blend back in the skin tones from the original image.

Tonemapping also tends to produce some really noticeable halos at the horizon when used for landscapes that would need to be corrected. I still tonemap HDR images but in most cases there is much merging work to be done. My goal is to get the images as close to reality as possible which means that if you can tell it was processed with HDR techniques then I've failed.

Thanks for the White Balance tips! I've always thought it was easier working with my white balances in Camera RAW when I had every shot set to flash. I've learned over the past few weeks that AUTO1 is an amazing setting and that the camera does a very good job at setting the WB. I'm not even patient enough to dick around with white balance in manual yet. Thanks for the tips!

[Manfred M]

Thanks for the White Balance tips! I've always thought it was easier working with my white balances in Camera RAW when I had every shot set to flash. I've learned over the past few weeks that AUTO1 is an amazing setting and that the camera does a very good job at setting the WB. I'm not even patient enough to dick around with white balance in manual yet. Thanks for the tips!

Be very careful with autoWB. Because the camera calculates a new WB point for every shot, you can actually get some fairly wierd results with a colour shift from image to image, especially if there is a change in light. If you leave all of the WB to what the camera captured, it can result in some strange things happening to the jpegs and default values you open up in Photoshop. The same thing goes for autofocus (unless you set a single point focus); with some of the matrix metering modes the camera can select a slightly different focus point and can again lead to some strange artifacts when you blend the multiple images with the HDR tools.

That being said, as you are working in RAW, I would set my WB to be identical as you process the files in ACR to get around that issue.

When I shoot HDR, I focus and then disconnect the AF mechanism, I manually set the ISO, I use a preset WB and I either do my exposures 100% manual or use shutter priority mode and use the camera's autobracket function to just change the shutter speed for each of the shots. As was mentioned by others, do not touch the aperture or your DoF will change between shots. You definitely don't want this.

[ajohnw]

The only problem I have had with merging images is lighting changes when shooting indoors - clouds outside and for one reason or the other not being able to take the shots quickly.

John
-

[zkogut]

I need to learn how to do bracketing.

[Manfred M]

I need to learn how to do bracketing.

Actually it's quite easy to do, even if your camera does not have an autobracket feature, using manual.

Set up on a tripod and meter to get the starting point. Remeber the aperture setting and shutter speed. Change the camera over to Manual mode and dial in the aperture and shutter speed.

Take your base shot. Then increase your shutter speed 4x from base and take another shot and then take a third shot at 1/4x of base. in terms of eV you are trying for -2, 0 and +2 shots.

As an example. If you are shooting ISO 200 at f/11 at 1/100th for your first (base) shot, then your second shot should at 1/400th (-2 eV) and your third shot at 1/25th (+2 eV) without changing the ISO and aperture settings. That will give you three shots with a wide enough exposure range to bring out the shadow detail and highlight detail when you run the three shots through the HDR software

[ajohnw]

Some will need more than +/- 2 EV Manfred. That's why I posted the one earlier that used exposures from 5 sec down to 1/160 sec. I've no idea how many stops that is. The aim needs to be to get a good exposure of all of the various light levels in the scene that is being shot.

I also feel it's worth pointing out that generally circa 7 stops can be recovered from a camera jpg. More from raw. +/-2 in respect to that aspect isn't many at all.

John
-

[FrankMi]

Actually it's quite easy to do, even if your camera does not have an autobracket feature, using manual.

I did all my Exposure Bracketing manually for the past 3 years this way as my D3100 didn't have this feature. The only difference was the D3100 did have EV compensation so I set Aperture Priority and used the EV setting to adjust the shutter speed. The result is identical to what Manfred describes.