Any tips for doing foliage - HDR

[arith]

I get a lot of blur in foliage even in a light wind, is there anything I can do to make a better image?

This is a panorama of two HDRI's over a span of 9 ev. Possibly needlessly since I keep going until the histogram starts moving right.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Arith,

I think we'll always struggle with multiple shots for HDR when there's movement like this.

I'd suggest taking just a single shot - RAW - at a high-enough shutterspeed so that motion isn't excessive, and go from there.

I doubt that there's much in this scene that a good RAW exposure wouldn't be able to handle (I'd be happy to have a crack at processing if for you as a test if you like).

The other technique that might help is to try working with 2 versions of the same RAW file -- it still contains the same amount of information, but if can make processing a little easier.

[arith]

Hi Arith,

I think we'll always struggle with multiple shots for HDR when there's movement like this.

I'd suggest taking just a single shot - RAW - at a high-enough shutterspeed so that motion isn't excessive, and go from there.

I doubt that there's much in this scene that a good RAW exposure wouldn't be able to handle (I'd be happy to have a crack at processing if for you as a test if you like).

The other technique that might help is to try working with 2 versions of the same RAW file -- it still contains the same amount of information, but if can make processing a little easier.

I'll look up a couple of RAW files, but I cannot upload them to fotki since they only accept jpeg. I can't seem to do a pseudo HDRI with picturenaut and I like to see some definition in shadows and not too much white.

The main reason I became interested in HDRI is the potential for showing foliage, leaves mainly as leaves and not an awful porridge, although some turn out ok, I'm forever cloning and sharpening/blurring with a brush.

[Colin Southern]

I'll look up a couple of RAW files, but I cannot upload them to fotki since they only accept jpeg.

If you want to get some RAWs to me just pop along to www.sendthisfile.com - create a free account - put in your own addesss as a destination - and then just copy/paste the link to me in a PM - works like a charm

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Arith,

If this was just a test shot to demo the HDR problems you're having, then the following won't be much help, but if not, it may be.

The whole lot could do with an anti-clockwise twist to sort the verticals and compositionally, the central trunk dividing the frame into two halves isn't great - but might allow a divider to treat the non-challenging left half more simply (and with less movement) than the right half.

I think you could achieve a lot of what you're after with more conventional processing, do take up Colin's offer.

Cheers,

[carregwen]

I really think you would gain more by thinking about the composition of your shots. This one is bisected by the tree trunk and the two halves look very different halves. I know that's harder to avoid with a panorama because of the scope of the shot, but this really does look like two separate shots joined together. Also, I think it's not level - that tower is leaning to the right.

If you have unwanted motion in an HDR sequence all you can do is make the HDR from a single RAW using a fast shutter speed. Are you sure you aligned the shots correctly in the merge process?

rob

[arith]

I really think you would gain more by thinking about the composition of your shots. This one is bisected by the tree trunk and the two halves look very different halves. I know that's harder to avoid with a panorama because of the scope of the shot, but this really does look like two separate shots joined together. Also, I think it's not level - that tower is leaning to the right.

If you have unwanted motion in an HDR sequence all you can do is make the HDR from a single RAW using a fast shutter speed. Are you sure you aligned the shots correctly in the merge process?

rob

This is unfortunately the only view of the tower and bridge, and unfortunately as far back as I can get plus the widest lens I have is 28mm. I know the tower appears to be leaning but I always level my tripod as well as I can, and if I rotate right I get to lose more on the right top and more importantly the flag.

I use autostitch to put them together and it is a bit of a lottery to how they come out the other end.

I will look for a file now.

cheers.

Scratch the rotating comment, it is leaning right so rotate anti-clockwise, for some reason I didn't do that.

[Colin Southern]

This is unfortunately the only view of the tower and bridge

How about standing in the water wearing a pair of waders? (I have to resort to this kind of thing quite often).

[arith]

How about standing in the water wearing a pair of waders? (I have to resort to this kind of thing quite often).

No chance of that; tripod in the water wow that is dedication.

I put some files up; I don't understand what is required so there are four, and hopefully they are the right four; since I cannot see them easily.

They are;

Sept00354 (1).CRW
Sept00354 (1).THM
Sept00363.CRW
Sept00363.THM

they are at downloads.arismetique.com/

http://downloads.arismetique.com/Sept00354 (1).CRW
http://downloads.arismetique.com/Sept00354 (1).THM

http://downloads.arismetique.com/Sept00363.CRW
http://downloads.arismetique.com/Sept00363.THM

Sometimes I think I must be on drugs



Only headless ducks and blur

[Colin Southern]

Hi Arith,

It's the 2 *.CRW ones that I needed - I'll have a look at these tonight for you

[Colin Southern]

Hi Arith,

This is the best that I could do - I manually overlayed the two images into the best position that I could get them into, and then just used a soft eraser to transition between the two (at the tree trunk which bisects the image) (a good point to transition the images).

A level tripod with a panning base helps a lot - that way you can swing back and forth several times to check that things are level. The images weren't very sharp - probably just the camera/lens combination that you were using, so I doubt you'll get them much better without upgrading. I applied sharpening at various stages to get the best I could out of it. Other than that, just some minor levels and saturation adjustments.

What do you think?

[arith]

I think it is fantastic, you are right it is a cheap canon lens but all I can afford unfortunately. The best I can afford to do a decent photo. I have another that is older and from 80-200mm, without all the bells like USM and IS but it actually appears sharper but that could just be my eyes.

Everything is second hand including the polariser, I thought it important to get a decent filter in order to not add to the degradation and it cost more than a cheap new one.

The tripod is very cheap but sturdy; I noticed a lot of flexibility with what the spirit level calls level and this must be my levelling problem.

Cheers, that is a real good effort.

It would be impossible here to go into the water because it is over-run by teenagers with skateboards, and I only had a small opportunity to get the bridge unoccupied, although the other way looking into sun at a church behind trees might be more interesting in the early morning.

Thank you very much for your help.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Arith,

Glad you liked it

If you think getting into the water is too tough, take a look at what Joe McNally gets up to to get the shot ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEAKQFddTLI&feature=fvw

[arith]

Hi Arith,

Glad you liked it

If you think getting into the water is too tough, take a look at what Joe McNally gets up to to get the shot ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEAKQFddTLI&feature=fvw

Going in the water doesn't look so bad now.