Steeeeed needs some digital processing advice

[ayesane]

You are basically describing a manual hdr technique

This ^^. HDR does not describe a piece of technology which does this automatically - it's a technique. Doing it by hand can make it appear less cheap but it's still HDR by definition. Soz lads.

I'm not sure I agree 100%. The human eye does have a much higher dynamic range than any sensor, apparently many order's of magnitude better. This is mainly due to it being logarithmic instead of linear in nature.

HDR when done correctly is an attempt to simulate this.

wreng way around marra. Aperture is logarithmic, the human eye see's linear. Or have I read you wrong?

 

[Icarebecauseyoudo]

Human eye 10 - 14 stops, Phase One / Leaf 12 stops

Not much difference really

I wish steed had been round the other side of the shooting hut getting some of that light falling on it... No?

 

[Iain Hesford's Bait Box]

You are basically describing a manual hdr technique

not really. Just extending the dynamic range to be somewhere near that of slide film. Not extracting detail from shadow regions like HDR, getting it closer to what the eye can see.

 

[Icarebecauseyoudo]

not really. Just extending the dynamic range to be somewhere near that of slide film. Not extracting detail from shadow regions like HDR, getting it closer to what the eye can see.

Slide film has less dynamic range than virtually any digi sensor old chum, so I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. Velvia has 5 stops max, Provia 6 maybe

It's certainly looks a better technique than what we generally think of as HDR, but it's still HDR

 

[HebburnMackem]

Human eye 10 - 14 stops, Phase One / Leaf 12 stops

Not much difference really

I wish steed had been round the other side of the shooting hut getting some of that light falling on it... No?

I'm talking about the bare 'sensor' though, without assistance from the iris or aperture changes. Which is what would be needed to get this sort of image in a single capture.

From Wiki:
"The retina has a static contrast ratio of around 100:1 (about 6.5 f-stops). ...full adaptation through adjustments in retinal chemistry (the Purkinje effect) are mostly complete in thirty minutes. Hence, a dynamic contrast ratio of about 1,000,000:1 (about 20 f-stops) is possible.[4] "

 

[Icarebecauseyoudo]

I'm talking about the bare 'sensor' though, without assistance from the iris or aperture changes. Which is what would be needed to get this sort of image in a single capture.

From Wiki:
"The retina has a static contrast ratio of around 100:1 (about 6.5 f-stops). ...full adaptation through adjustments in retinal chemistry (the Purkinje effect) are mostly complete in thirty minutes. Hence, a dynamic contrast ratio of about 1,000,000:1 (about 20 f-stops) is possible.[4] "

But what you are saying it that it takes half an hour for your eyes to work their best in the dark? We are just talking about viewing this scene.. They don't work much better than the best digi sensors

 

[Iain Hesford's Bait Box]

This ^^. HDR does not describe a piece of technology which does this automatically - it's a technique. Doing it by hand can make it appear less cheap but it's still HDR by definition. Soz lads.

not if you don't admit to it. That'll buy me some time from the HDR polis

 

[ayesane]

not if you don't admit to it. That'll buy me some time from the HDR polis

I'm saying nowt I do shit loads in shop' to make skin smooth, hair shine and eyes pop.. So I can sell a framed version - which is just as bad if not worse then some cheeky semi-HDR, exposure blending..

 

[MalmöMakem]

Eh.... Where did the clouds come from!?

google.

basically just use vector masks and shadow highlight tools. bit of the eraser and you have that.

Obviously if i was doing the photo i'd take separate photos of sky and ground and maybe one for the middle ground.

And i know fudge all about HDR. I just see those horrible glowing messes of colour. No idea if its what I've done. But like the image the bloke was trying to replicate. It looks more normal than some of the typical HDR shots.

 

[Steeeeed]

Thanks for the advice everyone.

 

[HebburnMackem]

Here is a recent HDR sequence that I took in Hebburn. I used 5 exposures and used aperture instead of ISO bracketing. I used HDR techniques because the image had a very bright sky (very near the sun, I forget) and some fairly dark shadows.

Here are the original exposures (from RAW CR2 files):

Logon or register to see this image

Although I do use Photomatix, the example below uses Photoshop CS6, HDR Pro (earlier versions have this too). I then re-imported the 32-Bit Tiff back into Lightroom 4 to bring out the details.

Below is that final processed 32-Bit HDR image.

Logon or register to see this image

The image below I tried to simulate the same effect from a SINGLE exposure, instead of using multiple+HDR. I used a single exposure that was in the middle of the exposure range.



As you can see, it just does not work. There is just not the information present in a single RAW exposure for it to work, even with 12-Bits per channel that is present in Canon CR2 files.


Anyway, I hope this further helps.

 

[Iain Hesford's Bait Box]

I know you're just showing off the technique, but the middle shot in the sequence looks fine to me. It doesn't need the processing. The shadows on the final HDR just look odd.

 

[ayesane]

I know you're just showing off the technique, but the middle shot in the sequence looks fine to me. It doesn't need the processing. The shadows on the final HDR just look odd.

Yer reet, it's the shadows which the HDR is removing.. which is a time of day thing init?

Was there a need to grab the shot there and then? If you liked the composition it would have been a shit load better to come back at dusk wouldn't it?

 

[HebburnMackem]

Yer reet, it's the shadows which the HDR is removing.. which is a time of day thing init?

Was there a need to grab the shot there and then? If you liked the composition it would have been a shit load better to come back at dusk wouldn't it?

Absolutely. If I came back when it wasn't so very sunny I'd have got a perfect single capture image.

I did however like the direction and length of the tree shadows.

As mentioned, I was just demonstrating the technique really.