High dynamic range digital photography offers a solution to the limitations of working with available light.
Properly executed, a HDR image can display unparalleled ranges of light.
Dynamic range is the variation in luminance from the brightest to the darkest areas of a scene. HDR simply means a much wider range of brightness values than what we are accustomed to seeing.
To create HDR images, multiple exposures of the same scene are taken then merged together in HDR software. Tone mapping is applied through the HDR software. The resultant image is then exported in either 8 bit, 16 bit or 32 bit colour as a .tif or .jpg file.
The file is then opened in photo editing software (eg Photoshop) and tonal contrast, hue/saturation and sharpening actions added to suit the personal taste of the creator. The final result can then be exported in whatever file format (8bit, 16bit or 32bit colour) and dpi setting required to suit the final output size of the image.
The HDR process can control noise in shadows, capture detail in dark areas and retain detail in highlights. There are visual limitations to HDR as some subjects simply do not suit it. However, if you like scenic photos with lots of Wham, Zap and Pow in them, plus incredible detail, then HDR is a process you should investigate. Interior architecture images, full of detail and great tonal range can be achieved without having to use expensive lighting set ups.
I have just started experimenting with HDR digital photography. My first attempt is quite satisfying but there are still lots of learning to do.
The attached images were shot as three exposures (+1EV,0EV and -1EV) in Raw format on a very, very dull winter’s afternoon.
Image A was the best result I could achieve using Photoshop’s merge feature plus lots of levels and hue/saturation adjustments. The sky is still overexposed and general look is still a flat result.
Image B is the HDR result of merging the three exposures in Photomatix Pro*, tone mapping the merged result in Photomatix Pro, exporting it as a .tif file then slightly tweeking contrast and sharpening in Photoshop. The sky has more detail and definition is better in plants and rocks.
The HDR result will not be to everyone’s taste but it clearly demonstrates the added levels of detail, contrast and colour rendering that’s possible in HDR digital photography.
Remember this is only my first attempt. Who knows what’s possible with more experimenting and practice?
To find out more about HDR, simply enter - hdr images - in a Google search.
The HDR result will not be to everyone’s taste but it clearly demonstrates the added levels of detail, contrast and colour rendering that’s possible in HDR digital photography.
Remember this is only my first attempt. Who knows what’s possible with more experimenting and practice?
To find out more about HDR, simply enter - hdr images - in a Google search.
* I have used the free trial download of Photomatix Pro. When I pay for the real version the watermarks will not be applied to my images! http://www.hdrsoft.com/
7 comments:
Nice HDR work. Some nighttime HDR shots take on a surreal look, can look a bit overcooked. You can merge for HDR in photoshop as well. Definitely a good fun thing to try.
Great work Roger. Very natural looking which isn't always the case with HDR. I personally quite like the over the top ones but not so much for landscape shots.
I would love to hear others feelings about whether HDR work like this would come under the open print section or would it be considered creative/experimental?
DX: You're right about danger of overcooked colour which is why I'm going to buy Photomatix Pro - the degree of control possible when tone mapping and adjusting colour in this program is extensive.
Patti: I also like some of the over the top results as they can look artistic as apposed to 'reality'. Each subject has to be treated on its merits.
Patti - to my sense of morality HDR is fine, as is stitching photos to make panoramas. Both these just use techniques to present what we saw in a true fashion. Adding clouds means you are creating an image that never really existed. I don't like that really but under VAPS rules is legal. what about cloning out dirt spots, what about cloning distracting objects out?
I have used HDR to capture skies better. I do want to try some night HDR and get those extreme effects for fun.
Shooting in raw means clouds are captured in their reality (not being added to the image at a later time). Tone mapping an HDR file just recovers clouds in all their original tonal values. Our eyes see a much greater tonal range than viewable in a tif or jpg file. HDR gives a result closer to what our eyes see.
I agree that HDR helps to overcome some of the limitations of the camera. Very similar to stitching panorama shots, just overlaying them rather than stitching. Seems a lot more valid that replacing boring skys or cloning out electricity poles when you think about it. Not sure where you draw the line between that and surreal type images, or even if there is a way to draw the line, other than if it looks over the top its experimental - all seems a little vague doesn't it.
Post a Comment