Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > HDR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 14, 2009, 4:16 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 117
Default

From my limited time with Photomatix it looks like there is enough variability to get similar effects to all three samples shown by Simple. Am I far off base here? I certainly can't afford to buy more than one of these programs
cczych is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2009, 4:37 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cczych View Post
From my limited time with Photomatix it looks like there is enough variability to get similar effects to all three samples shown by Simple. Am I far off base here? I certainly can't afford to buy more than one of these programs
You are right about that. You can go the whole range with Photomatix.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 14, 2009, 8:42 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
Acapulco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: 58 North 11 Long
Posts: 541
Default

simple, how about posting the same experiment on a HDR merge done in Photoshop CS4 also?

some notes on what I think of each program... Dynamic Photo I think is brilliant if you want a over the top artsy look. (of course you can still generate at the other spectrum if you want)
I also really love the alignment adjustment tool from Dynamic Photo. Really easy to use and works really great.
Photomatix makes great Detail HDRs and has awesome automatic alignment.
CS4 is really if you love the use of curves, but this way can be very tedious and some HDR projects can be very difficult to operate using this technique.
You can use curves in Dynamic Photo too BTW.
__________________
Nikon D300

Flikkaarrrr

Last edited by Acapulco; Oct 14, 2009 at 8:52 PM.
Acapulco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2009, 12:11 AM   #34
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,193
Default

if i had a choice in just buying one application then no doubt it would be photomatix cczych.
dont be thrown on what i am putting and displaying im just trying to keep eveyones option open .

acapulco i dont and cannot use cs4 it is beyond me
simple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2009, 12:44 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
Acapulco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: 58 North 11 Long
Posts: 541
Default

Hehe, ok. fair enough. If it's OK, when I do get another HDR project going, I'll make a big hoedown with CS4 , Photomatix and maybe some others if that's OK.

Can't wait till your next HDR, mate
__________________
Nikon D300

Flikkaarrrr
Acapulco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2009, 12:48 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,193
Default

haha thats fine cant wait to see what you come up with
simple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2009, 12:50 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fredrikstad - Norway / Europe
Posts: 1,954
Default

I think that Bynx'es version is near perfection, if you crop some of the field in the foreground, like this f. istance, or maybe the sky is just a little to "over-the-top"?
Attached Images
 
Walter_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2009, 1:40 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fredrikstad - Norway / Europe
Posts: 1,954
Default Speaking of Photomatix Pro...

....there are in fact 3 options for rendering several exposures onto 1. The first one is "Exposure Fusion" or "Exposure Blending" which I will not comment here. But I'v been experimenting with the other two and find that in certain cases the #2-option can be as good as #1 - which is straight-forward Tone Mapping with the Detail Enhancer.

When you first start up PMP you click "Generate HDT Image" and the chose your 3 (or x) exposures - then the program starts and you get to choose your options ->




Tre program starts to load, align exposures and generate the HDR's. And after the Tone Mapping itself you get to choose your 2 other alternatives of creating the end-product:



And there on this page where all your tools are, top / left you will see two TABs right underneath the title-bar. On the TABs you can choose between:
Detail Enhancer and Tone Compressor with two different ways of producing a HDR.

Detail Enhancer is more fun and gives you more to tweek with and more tools to play with than Tone Compressor, but if you want a certain 'look' or 'feel' to your end-product, then choosing Tone Compressor sometimes can save an otherwise lost picture.

While the first alternative usually gives you a more rougher look and better enhanced texture (like rocks, stones, tree-surface, etc.) the second alternative is better in smoothing out details, giving more of an all-smooth look.

2 examples with either alternative - photos taken minutes apart with the same settings:



Detail Enhancer:



Tone Compressor:

That's it for today, folks!

Last edited by Walter_S; Oct 15, 2009 at 1:43 AM.
Walter_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2009, 6:49 AM   #39
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,585
Default

Detail enhancer is my preference since it gives the picture more lookability. The detail is great. It looks like an HDR but I like it nonetheless.
By the way lookability is not a word recognized by Webster.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2009, 9:28 AM   #40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

I downloaded the trial of Photomatrix, spent five minutes and made my first HDR shot.

Very nice...



And it only has one major problem. It looks nothing like the actual scene I captured...





Dave
Chato is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:57 PM.