5D3 HDR

digital

digital

Messages
1,180
Edit My Images
No
I had a brief play with in-camera HDR on a recent trip but the results were so stunningly unimpressive that I can't even work out which of the four saved images (I've actually narrowed it down to being one of two in each set) is the HDR version!

The images, when displayed in 'date taken' order, are numbered 15, 18, 16 and 17 for one set, and 23, 26, 24 and 25 for the other with the first two being close to each other in exposure, the third being very underexposed and the fourth very over exposed.

Is there a naming convention to indicate the HDR image? Are they, in this example, 18 and 26, the ones out of order?
 
If you shoot your main images in RAW then the HDR will be the JPG.

I've used the 5D3 in-camera HDR and I've been very impressed with it. It's not quite as good as creating a proper HDR with dedicated software but for in-camera created within a few seconds it's pretty damn good. Are you sure you're doing it right?
 
I shoot RAW to one card and jpg to the other and am looking at the four jpgs that are saved on the jpg card.
 
As Rob said if you shoot RAW, the HdR one will be a jpeg. Depending on what EV you chose, I think you will also be able to see (in the case of choosing one stop), -1 EV, 0 and +1EV in the exif?
I've played with HdR and its always been obvious to me. Perhaps what you were shooting didn't have a great dynamic range and it's therefore less obvious?
 
OK, I've worked it out (finally!).

The HDR image is the highest numbered of the four jpegs, so is the one shown out of order. Each of the three HDR images as shot is saved as a RAW with an equivalent numbered jpeg, but the actual HDR image is saved (naturally) as only a jpeg. Looking at the RAW numbering and then at the jpeg numbering I can see that the highest numbered is missing from the RAW set. Another clue was that the highest numbered was also slightly cropped when compared with the other three.

The basic problem with the results was that there wasn't much of a dynamic range in the scenes I shot and the resulting HDR was very flat.
 
Yep, should be easy to work out (if not just by looking at the image) as you figured, there would be 3 raw files and 4 JPEG files, so the HDR is the extra JPEG.

HDR isn't something I'm interested in using, so only had a quick play to see what the camera did, but the result was fairly impressive, especially considering I shot handheld without putting any thought into the shots.

digital said:
The basic problem with the results was that there wasn't much of a dynamic range in the scenes I shot and the resulting HDR was very flat.
Click to expand...

Like any tool, it's something you should use to solve a problem that exists, not just use it because you can. And, the whole reasoning behind HDR is to create a flatter image, so no real surprise there. :thumbs:
 
Jayst84 said:
Like any tool, it's something you should use to solve a problem that exists, not just use it because you can. And, the whole reasoning behind HDR is to create a flatter image, so no real surprise there. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

I wasn't looking to solve a problem, but to explore an effect that might be useful in presentation. My understanding is that HDR is about getting a result with more punch from the greater range rather than one that is flatter.
 
Byker28i said:
If your shot was flat, did you try vivid?
Click to expand...

No, I was on a landing on Svalbard and so time was short and conditions a little difficult in terms of playing with the camera's menu. It wasn't a serious experiment either. Just one of those 'I wonder what might happen if I try that?' moments.

I've only got round to having a look at the results now I'm back home and have realised that I should have tried each of the camera's HDR settings for comparison. If I get the chance in the next few days I'll do just that.
 
I've found it works quite well, used it a few times recently for interior shots.

such as;

152028540.jpg


Worth playing with as you'll always have the raws anyway
 
I've played with it. 2x RAW merged manually in PS are way superior, and even a single RAW can go further if exposed properly. And HDR or merging require tripod and no movement of anything...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top