Memories in HDR

[Tareq Alhemrani]

Hi all,

This is my first post here

Glasgow


Oban

[Zephyrize]

Some people claim that HDR are unrealistic, but sometimes all the colour just give an epic result like the second one.
Also, I would like to know, HDR are composed of multiple exposures, so how did you avoid ghosting in the first one (or even in the second for the ducks and water in the foreground) ?
I mean, even if your camera have very very fast burst, the cars would still not match in the bracketed pics..

[Tareq Alhemrani]

Some people claim that HDR are unrealistic, but sometimes all the colour just give an epic result like the second one.
Also, I would like to know, HDR are composed of multiple exposures, so how did you avoid ghosting in the first one (or even in the second for the ducks and water in the foreground) ?
I mean, even if your camera have very very fast burst, the cars would still not match in the bracketed pics..

Secret, many people asking me how i did that, but i can't tell because i am not an expert or pro, and i just do it for fun, and i now many don't like HDR, so i don't try to cover my method/processing of my HDR.

You try yourself and i am sure you can get something decent better than me.

[Dave Humphries]

Zephyrize,

The usual method is two conversions from a single RAW file, one 'exposed' for the highlights and the other for the shadows, then processed by the HDR s/w.

[Colin Southern]

I think in HDR discussions here we're in danger of letting some careless use of terminology become accepted practice, which in turn is starting to give some people the wrong idea.

Almost by definition you can't make a HDR image from a single exposure - all you're really doing is tone mapping different portions of the same dynamic range into 2 or more images and then combining them in the same way one would handle a true HDR image. The single exposure technique doesn't produce anything that couldn't be produced from the single exposure - although - doing it this way can certainly prove easier. It's probably more correct to call it "psudo-HDR"; it may have an HDR look to it (ie flat - washed out - and with grossly messed up local contrast, but none-the-less appealing for the effect it creates) , but it's still only working with what were a "normal" range of values at the time of the capture.

In a true HDR image the dynamic range of the scene is too great for the camera to capture in a single exposure; for a single shot you'd either have unrecoverable blown highlights and/or shadows that were indistinguishable from the noise floor, and no amount of processing from a single exposure is going to recover them.

[Tareq Alhemrani]

Yes, HDR can't be done by only 1 single file, even there are ways to do it but this will make it different than HDR purpose itself, the point is to have at least 2 different exposed shots to merge both and blending them for proper overall HDR, but the problem is, which HDR are considered to be good enough? some prefer that is so unrealistic or surreal over one that is natural look HDR, so how can you identify a good HDR?

[Colin Southern]

... but the problem is, which HDR are considered to be good enough? some prefer that is so unrealistic or surreal over one that is natural look HDR, so how can you identify a good HDR?

In my opinion, it's up to the artist to do as they wish, and up to the customer to decide if they like it or not.

I typically see 4 types of HDR images ...

1. Those where it's been used to produce a natural looking image,

2. Those where the range of levels is such that it's not possible to produce a natural looking image,

3. Those where it's possible to produce a realistic looking image, but the file has been processed poorly, and

4. Those where artist is looking for a surreal effect

Whereas I find some of the "surreal" variety interesting, I've yet to personally discover any commercial potential in them - I prefer the first category personally.

[Tareq Alhemrani]

In my opinion, it's up to the artist to do as they wish, and up to the customer to decide if they like it or not.

I typically see 4 types of HDR images ...

1. Those where it's been used to produce a natural looking image,

2. Those where the range of levels is such that it's not possible to produce a natural looking image,

3. Those where it's possible to produce a realistic looking image, but the file has been processed poorly, and

4. Those where artist is looking for a surreal effect

Whereas I find some of the "surreal" variety interesting, I've yet to personally discover any commercial potential in them - I prefer the first category personally.

OK, no problem, we will show those "natural looking" HDR for those who like it that way, soon i will post more "realistic" HDR and see.

Anyway, can you show us those natural look HDR so we can see why they are natural look?