HDR/Tonemapping warning!!

huddart84

huddart84

Messages
70
Name
kevin
Edit My Images
Yes
Went down to Roman Lakes Leisure Park in Marple, Stockport and stumbled upon some machinery just waiting to have their picture taken!! I personally love HDR style pics as long as they arent TOO over cooked. It was my first day out with my new fisheye lens that my wonderful Girlfriend bought me for xmas. Your thoughts please ?? (y)(y)

1)
6590237087_37e4135f9f_b.jpg


2)
6590203283_4909c85a35_b.jpg


3)
6590186047_b07f11670f_b.jpg


4)
6590175653_53df984062_b.jpg


5)
6590153249_5f35f32d99_b.jpg


Thanks for looking and please do let me know what you think :wave::wave:
 
Last edited:
Not a bad set at all Kevin and certainly not overcooked, for me #3 stands out for composition, sky and HDR quality.
 
MWHCVT said:
Were these done with Photomatix by any chance :LOL: it's nothing against the photo's because I like them but this has the Photomatix look to them :shrug:

Matt
MWHCVT
Click to expand...

They were indeed done with photomatix Matt. I'm new to the world of HDR and I don't really know what software to use other than this. Do you know of any better? Thanks for commenting :)
 
huddart84 said:
They were indeed done with photomatix Matt. I'm new to the world of HDR and I don't really know what software to use other than this. Do you know of any better? Thanks for commenting :)
Click to expand...

Personally I use Dynamic Photo HDR I find it to be a lot nicer to use to can make adjustments easily and there are some good presets also, I've always found that Photomatix tends to render the image in a way that makes it look rather flat :shrug:

Matt
 
I really like this set too No 1 & 4 I think are the best. Quite like the boot print in pic 4 as well. Really good depth of field.
 
Not bad for a first session with a new lens (y)

I think you could push the compositions a little harder to bring out the best from the fisheye lens. The HDR/tonemapping, there's still large blocks of blown detail in the sky. This is either because you haven't taken exposures far enough apart or because the processing hasn't fully utilised the available detail. There's a bit of softness in some places, this could be the Photomatrix processing (I agree that it has that look), but what aperture were you using?

But all in all, a good set and I'll be looking out to see where you're heading with this style..
 
MWHCVT said:
Personally I use Dynamic Photo HDR I find it to be a lot nicer to use to can make adjustments easily and there are some good presets also, I've always found that Photomatix tends to render the image in a way that makes it look rather flat :shrug:

Matt
Click to expand...

Ah brilliant I will have a look at that and see how the results differ!

Thanks again Matt :)
 
Alastair said:
Not bad for a first session with a new lens (y)

I think you could push the compositions a little harder to bring out the best from the fisheye lens. The HDR/tonemapping, there's still large blocks of blown detail in the sky. This is either because you haven't taken exposures far enough apart or because the processing hasn't fully utilised the available detail. There's a bit of softness in some places, this could be the Photomatrix processing (I agree that it has that look), but what aperture were you using?

But all in all, a good set and I'll be looking out to see where you're heading with this style..
Click to expand...

Thanks Alastair,

I have just been advised of another piece of software to try out so will see how that goes.

As for aperture, I'm not 100% sure what I used, I can't remember :s
 
Have a look at FDRtools, I find it much easier to use than Photomatrix and gives excellent results. The biggest problem for me with Photomatrix is that it tries do do it all and it's just not that good as a general image editor, I much prefer to get the basic HDR and tonemap done and then take the (rather flat looking result) into PSE or Lightroom to polish up.

I mention the aperture, bacause with an ultrawide-angle lens such as a fisheye the hyperfocal aperture is surprisingly small, allowing you to stay well within the sweet spot of the lens for sharpness. DOFmaster will give you a depth of field table for the focal length.
 
I know I'm biased on this one but I like the last one (y) a nice angle and composition and it just seems more (really want a better words) dynamic :bang: and more 3D compared to the photomatix ones that I still maintain look a bit flat, I think the only way to really show it would be to process the same photo through both programs to show it side by side :thinking:

I've just looks at the previous version of this one and I still prefer this one :D

Matt
 
Have to agree with matt on this one, photomatix does some really funky stuff to my pictures:shrug:
 
damn good..photo matix seems to be a good buy
cheers
geof
 
dcash29 said:
Whats the shading in the trees and around the cab and bucket?
Click to expand...

There's some very pronounced softening around the edges, and a rather square vignette on the short sides?

Is this a true fisheye lens (e.g. the Samyang) or a fisheye adapter lens?
 
Kevin, just had a search on this adapter. It seems that vignetting, edge softness and chromatic aberattion are known issues, although some put this down to the 16mm pancake rather than the adapter. A suggestion in a couple of places is to stick with f/8-10 to maximise sharpness, and perhaps go +1EV to minimise the vignetting.

It's probably worth downloading the Lightroom 14 day trial and see if there's a profile for this lens. LR has some very good lens profiles.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcash29
Whats the shading in the trees and around the cab and bucket?

huddart84 said:
I'm not sure actually, I hadn't noticed until you mentioned it!! :(
Click to expand...

Is it on the originals? Hopefully its what youve done in Photomatix otherwise its time to start worrying
 
dcash29 said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcash29
Whats the shading in the trees and around the cab and bucket?

Is it on the originals? Hopefully its what youve done in Photomatix otherwise its time to start worrying
Click to expand...

It's a combination of three images so I will have a good look and see. You've got me a little worried now :(. I hope it is photomatix!
 
Alastair said:
A suggestion in a couple of places is to stick with f/8-10 to maximise sharpness, and perhaps go +1EV to minimise the vignetting.

It's probably worth downloading the Lightroom 14 day trial and see if there's a profile for this lens. LR has some very good lens profiles.
Click to expand...

Thanks Alastair, I had a look at the DOFmaster website that you advised and concluded that f8 was a potential improvement so I will try that next time I am out and about.

Also, I have light room so I will have a look at that also (there was mention of tidying images up after processing in photomatix)

Thank you for all the advice you have given, it is MUCH appreciated :)
 
Hi Kevin,
Ive just run this through LR, upped the blacks and sharpened it a bit.

Nice set BTW.

6590186047_b07f11670f_b-2.jpg


Graham
 
One trick I've found to quickly polish up a HDR after tonemapping is to take one of the darker exposures (around -2EV) and put this as a layer over the tonemapped version. Start with the opacity around 30% with Darken mode and have a play around until you've put just enough depth back into the shadows to lift the image. This is particularly effective when you're doing a fast-and-dirty 3-shot AEB.
 
Alastair said:
One trick I've found to quickly polish up a HDR after tonemapping is to take one of the darker exposures (around -2EV) and put this as a layer over the tonemapped version. Start with the opacity around 30% with Darken mode and have a play around until you've put just enough depth back into the shadows to lift the image. This is particularly effective when you're doing a fast-and-dirty 3-shot AEB.
Click to expand...

Thanks Alastair, I'll keep that in mind next time I get out and do a HDR. How many shots would it normally be worth taking to get maximum effect? And should I space by 1EV or 2EV?

Thanks again Alastair you've been a big help :)
 
uniquegardens said:
Hi Kevin,
Ive just run this through LR, upped the blacks and sharpened it a bit.

Nice set BTW.

Graham
Click to expand...

Thanks graham, I was quite please pleased with myself after getting home and processing the shots. The shadows around the cab and bucket are really bugging me now it's been mentioned though :bang:
 
huddart84 said:
Thanks Alastair, I'll keep that in mind next time I get out and do a HDR. How many shots would it normally be worth taking to get maximum effect? And should I space by 1EV or 2EV?

Thanks again Alastair you've been a big help :)
Click to expand...

As many as it needs.. sounds vague, but every situation is different.

Outdoors - you want to get the shots as quickly as possible to avoid cloud movement. I usually go with 3 shots, +/-2 on AEB.

Indoors - I become an obsessive with indoor HDR sequences, 1 stop increments all the way from near-black to near-white. This could be anything from 8 to 14 exposures. But I think the results justify it.



(and yes, I mostly use HDR for churches and cathedrals)
 
huddart84 said:
Thanks Geof, i like using Photomatix. It doesn't seem to be everyone's cup of tea though :)
Click to expand...

i know i had a bash with the free model
i eventually bought oloneo photo engine at around £99...they do a cheaper version which is hdr only..
my failing is not taking loads of differing shots at differing exposures so i dont really get the 'real deal'....but the tone mapping part is ok so far...i think:thinking:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top