New Idea For HDR

[cristo2000]

Hi. This is very unconventional but seems to work. Unless someone can point out why it might not!
I take one shot and then change lightness and contrast in PSP12. Put these 3 images in Photomatix and hey presto!! Please judge for yourselves

[rogerb]

Well, the original purpose of High Dynamic Range Imaging (aka HDRI, or HDR), was to be able to capture an image dynamic range that is greater than what the camera can do in a single shot. Modern cameras are now able to capture considerable tonal ranges but there are still instances where the contrast in the scene results in more dynamic range required than the camera can produce in a single exposure.

However "HDR" seems to have morphed into more tone mapping and local contrast manipulation for artistic purposes than what it was originally meant for. Single image HDR (some call it pseudo-HDR) has become quite popular because it's easy but it does not add dynamic range to the image at all (even when multiple images of different brightness are stacked but derived from a single shot from the camera). Instead, HDR software allows the user to manipulate the look of the image to suit his or her taste through the tone mapping process.

When you do as you've described, you are not adding dynamic range since you are still constricted by the dynamic range of the camera when taking a single shot.

I am personally not fond of the look of severely tone mapped images but that's just me and I may be in the minority. Your image does look very interesting.

[cristo2000]

Hi Rogerb. Thanks for taking the time to reply and explain the HDR concept. It's now a little clearer, (will read your comments again as not all of it has sunk in!) It's a learning curve for me so I'll persevere and do it the right way! Many thanks

[rogerb]

You're very welcome.
There are quite a few people on this forum that do a lot of HDR so there's a wealth of information to be had. Keep experimenting, asking questions, and keep having fun!

Roger

[James G]

Hi,
nothing further to add about the difference between tonemapping a single image and combining a sequence to get extended dynamic range.
I really like your shot of HMS Belfast? though.

I've been shooting bracketted HDR for a while now and I've seen the ship so many times when down in London and never thought to try this type of a shot.

Thanks for opening my eyes!

[ReticulationFree]

Can you explain more about the idea of tone mapping a single image? Is this done in post processing by distorting the output response curves?

[rogerb]

Tone mapping can be a very complex process, whether done on a single image or a combination of images. Here is a good reference on the subject: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_mapping

[ScoutR]

Can you explain more about the idea of tone mapping a single image? Is this done in post processing by distorting the output response curves?

Hi: I don't do HDR or tone mapping but I read everything here and noticed this just the other day. If you follow the link below you will find a recent discussion on tone mapping and an explaination from one of our moderators Colin Southern.

Tone Mapping

Everyone seemed to find it quite helpful.

[Colin Southern]

I am personally not fond of the look of severely tone mapped images but that's just me and I may be in the minority.

I'm the same. Some of them look quite artistic, but it's a look I get a bit bored with quite quickly.

For others who may be interested, we had a somewhat "robust discussion" of this some time back.

[_GUI_]

I am sorry to tell you this has nothing to do with HDR. This scene didn't have a high dynamic range. The unreallistic look is not pleasant to me.

Moreover I thought of Photomatix as soon as I looked at the image, since it has one of the typical Photomatix artifacts: see the pole with the Union Jack, the software interpreted the pole as the boundary separating two different areas. These two areas (sky) ended with a very different luminosiy making the image appear wrong.

Regards.

[Colin Southern]

Moreover I thought of Photomatix as soon as I looked at the image

Me too.

99 times out of 100 whenever I see this type of image, it's been produced with Photomatix. From what I've seen on the Photomatix user galleries it can also produce photorealistic images though.

Personally though I find that most of the time I can get away with a RAW capture exposed for the highlight, with a truckload of fill light added in.

[Colin Southern]

PS: for what it's worth, I can't wait to see what happens when the Somali pirates try attacking one of these

[Dave Humphries]

PS: for what it's worth, I can't wait to see what happens when the Somali pirates try attacking one of these

I should watch the news more!

Have they made it up the Thames then?

[Radu Dinu Cordeanu]

Hi,
Why"might not"?If through this way you arrived to represent us,what your mind's eyes saw,is ok.
Radu Dinu

[_GUI_]

If through this way you arrived to represent us,what your mind's eyes saw,is ok.

I don't think this is the case. The original intention of HDR is to approach with low dynamic range capture devices (camera) and rendering devices (print, screen), what our relatively high dynamic range visual system can perceive.

The problem is that more and more users are making use of HDR software in a different way: to introduce dramatic effects in their pictures that have no actual connection to dynamic range. So the effect achieved is the contrary to the intended: these images look unreallistic.

There is no problem about this, everyone is free to try techniques and use any software to dramatize their pictures. But let's make clear that this image is not closer to what our eyes would have seen in the Thames that a straight JPEG from the camera, it's just the opposite.

Regards

[arith]

I like this example but mostly dislike the art form intensely. It is not HDR and I'm more for naturalistic than abstract and I think it is harder to achieve a natural look. I like James train because that is about as abstract as I would like to get.

It is only the subject in the ship photo that allows it to succeed and I'm turned off by endless examples of rusty vehicles and strange grey sky.

But in this case I like it. cheers

[James G]

I'm glad that train caught your eye Arith.
I started in photography bak in the sixties in my early teens, and struggled for years to achieve relalistic interpretations of what interested me. I've worked variously in B&W, colour print and transparency.

My subjects tend to demand photorealism (no point in a pink Blackbird in my opinion), so I experiment with HDR as an aid to photo realistic presentation.

I think the problem is that it is easier to introduce hyper-reality as some people would describe it, rather than maintain realism with enhanced detail, toning etc.

Since the development of digital techniques and the truly phenomenal capability of even the simplest digital tools this last ten years, there was bound to be experimentation with the ways we 'manipulate' and present images.

I think a lot of recent tone mapping in images is better described as tone manipulation rather than mapping which in my simplistic approach falls into the category of Graphic Design. I've also come to the conclusion that there is no line that can be drawn about how far one should go, so personal taste becomes a a major factor in the response to such images.
I am of the opinion though, that there should be an intent behind the 'tweaking', and a judgement follow as to how successfull the end result is in respect of that initial intent.

On the basis of 'put up or shut up' A few cases of my own images for your consideration
1) the Train. I did deliberately shoot a bracketed series of shots and was taking advantage of an opportunity for an image that I had not expected to get. I had the camera and a standard lens but no opportunity to get my case and tripod and filters. I wanted to catch the atmosphere of live steam and a train that was 'ready to go'. As regards rendering the image I've always liked those 'between the wars' poster adverts for rail travel, and I thought that the HDR treatment would provide an element of that 'feel' in the image. I think I succeeded, in part, but am also aware that there was an unavoidable cost in terms of haloing etc and a loss of photo realism.

2) The River Lune at Christmas in the snow: In this instance I was after absolute photo realism. The day was not the brightest with a weak sun creating some interesting or warmth in the mist which kept advancing and retreating across the river. Bracketted shooting again, on a tripod but this time, I simply wanted the tone mapping to empasise the warmer tones in the mist where the sun was trying to break through. Arguably this resulted in areas of snow to be blown to the left of the image.

Having outlined my intent with these images, I accept that they may not be to everyones taste and , but I am still interested in feedback on how successful, or otherwise I've been in what I was trying to do.

[arith]

I like the light and mist; I want to do similar with a harder sun. cheers

[Radu Dinu Cordeanu]

I don't think this is the case. The original intention of HDR is to approach with low dynamic range capture devices (camera) and rendering devices (print, screen), what our relatively high dynamic range visual system can perceive.

The problem is that more and more users are making use of HDR software in a different way: to introduce dramatic effects in their pictures that have no actual connection to dynamic range. So the effect achieved is the contrary to the intended: these images look unreallistic.

There is no problem about this, everyone is free to try techniques and use any software to dramatize their pictures. But let's make clear that this image is not closer to what our eyes would have seen in the Thames that a straight JPEG from the camera, it's just the opposite.

Regards

Hi,
First goal of Viagra was different than now is but that is interesting for historians not for users.
All the best
Radu Dinu

[Colin Southern]

I don't think this is the case. The original intention of HDR is to approach with low dynamic range capture devices (camera) and rendering devices (print, screen), what our relatively high dynamic range visual system can perceive.

The problem is that more and more users are making use of HDR software in a different way: to introduce dramatic effects in their pictures that have no actual connection to dynamic range. So the effect achieved is the contrary to the intended: these images look unreallistic.

There is no problem about this, everyone is free to try techniques and use any software to dramatize their pictures. But let's make clear that this image is not closer to what our eyes would have seen in the Thames that a straight JPEG from the camera, it's just the opposite.

Well said.