What is easier to do and has better picture quality after editing?

Fred Miranda's DRI is a quick and easy solution in increasing dynamic range for your photos. But it's just a plug-in for Photoshop and you can tweak the settings after you're done with it(but not much). HDR however, takes a longer time to process your photos and can yield as high as 48bit files by merging your 16bit raw images. I suggest that you play around with both, and feel which is more applicable to you. But as for picture quality, I will have to go with HDR hands down.

Another option you can take is bracketing your photographs and making layers out of them in a single file. Mask out the areas you do not want to be there and mask in what ever is needed.

Hope this helps.

whats DRI?

DRI = dynamic range increase

thanks for the tip sir nino I will try you suggestion as I already do bracketing if I think it is needed.

Hi Nino,

For HDR, what is the best software to do tone mapping? I cannot seem to get it right with CS2's local adaptation. Have heard of photomatix but price pretty stiff. Any suggestions?

photomatix is pretty okay, but you might want to lower the luminance values to make the shot look more natural.

funny, just a few months ago, extreme HDR was all the rage, now most people want it milder. sorta like heavy make up that looks natural :D

Hi Nino,

For HDR, what is the best software to do tone mapping? I cannot seem to get it right with CS2's local adaptation. Have heard of photomatix but price pretty stiff. Any suggestions?

robert,

let me get back to you regarding photomatix. i just downloaded the trial version, i'll play with it first.

cs2's local adaptation of hdr is still far from perfect. the function was just recently included in cs2, we might see some substantial upgrades in future versions.

Nice thing with photomatix is it has an auto align function. Meaning, if you shoot handheld, there maybe a tolerable movement that photomatix can align your photos.

Going back to this topic: What is easier to do and has better picture quality after editing?

I should say it depends on what you want to achieve.

This photo is HDR using photo shop, you can see the shake:
http://static.flickr.com/71/165733231_5d410e220a_o.jpg

BTW, if you use Photomatix's trial version, your final photo will have it's watermark. This was a driveby shot, handheld, photomatix aligned it for me but you can still see a bit of movement:

http://static.flickr.com/51/145071083_6648a1d54a_o.jpg



And this one was done using DRI technique, no flash nor reflector used:

http://static.flickr.com/56/163015204_73aab59e5b_o.jpg


It is up to you what final output you want to achieve, then choose what technique would want to use.

Cheers,
Square

lovely examples you've got there, square.

it seems that HDR is excellent for MOS (man on the street) shots and other "ordinary shots" made to look extraordinary.

your DRI example on the other hand seems to be more faithful in recreating what the human eye can see.

chewy

great shots square

I think mastering them will be of great importance so as to create images that really do our subject justice.

Nice thing with photomatix is it has an auto align function. Meaning, if you shoot handheld, there maybe a tolerable movement that photomatix can align your photos.

Sir, how is the auto align feature in photomatix any different than what is already available in Photoshop CS2? I've already used the Merge to HDR feature and the "Align" option seems to work fine enough.

If you want to learn more about HDR buy the book

High Dynamic Range Imaging (Acquisition, Display, and Image-Based Lighting)
By Erik Reinhard, University of Central Florida
www.mkp.com

actually, regarding merge to hdr function of cs2, i tried shooting handheld, trying to get the framing as perfectly as possible (given the handheld situation), but photoshop came nowhere close to aligning the shots accurately... and what's worse is that you can't realign the pictures, once it's been "merged to hdr." the most you can do is choose which frames to include and exclude in the hdr, but you can't do any manual alignment. sadly. something to look forward to in CS3 hopefully. honestly, i think the merge to hdr function is very buggy still at this point.

i also noticed the same problem of alignment with the stitch function of photoshop actually.. shooting handheld, canon's photostitch (included with the camera) was able to do a wonderful job of stitching the photos together, but photoshop messed up badly with the exact same photos... what gives? i think photoshop needs to refine its algorithms and its AI to cope better with alignment... at the very least it should equal canon's extremely light and free (well fine, bundled) photostitch software.

actually, regarding merge to hdr function of cs2, i tried shooting handheld, trying to get the framing as perfectly as possible (given the handheld situation), but photoshop came nowhere close to aligning the shots accurately... and what's worse is that you can't realign the pictures, once it's been "merged to hdr." the most you can do is choose which frames to include and exclude in the hdr, but you can't do any manual alignment. sadly. something to look forward to in CS3 hopefully. honestly, i think the merge to hdr function is very buggy still at this point.

i also noticed the same problem of alignment with the stitch function of photoshop actually.. shooting handheld, canon's photostitch (included with the camera) was able to do a wonderful job of stitching the photos together, but photoshop messed up badly with the exact same photos... what gives? i think photoshop needs to refine its algorithms and its AI to cope better with alignment... at the very least it should equal canon's extremely light and free (well fine, bundled) photostitch software.

Poch, as a caveat when one wants to use the merge to HDR function in CS2... You should have used a tripod in obtaining your shots. You cannot expect perfect alignment with images taken handheld, specially if you're taking ideally 5-7 images worth of varying exposures and luminances... Something to ponder on. :Thinking:

Here's an example of an HDR using PS CS2 made from 3 different RAW exposures with a tripod.

http://static.flickr.com/75/164782014_7512d35fc0_o.jpg

ORTIGAS CENTER

Here's an example of an HDR using PS CS2 made from 3 different RAW exposures with a tripod.

http://static.flickr.com/75/164782014_7512d35fc0_o.jpg

ORTIGAS CENTER

Gerry,

Nice shot. Where did you take this pic? What are your exposures?

To all,
I believe HDR capture is impossible w/o a tripod. You even need a remote release or timer and even mirror lock-up to get your shots perfectly aligned. Any misalignment will decrease sharpness on the hdr image.

Thank you Mitz. It was taken from the rooftop of the Medical City Hospital. My exposures are 1.6sec (0EV), 3 sec (+1EV) and 0.8sec (-1EV) all at f/10.

Ok, ok. After HDR and DRI, I came across with LDR. I guess this is Low Dynamic Range. In PS, you cannot merge a photo from a single Raw file that is exposure altered using your Raw editor..... unless!, unless you convert them to 16bit and save it as TIFF. try it.... :P The results are not as great as a 3 exposure jpeg or raw or tiff file. but it will do.

I don't know if you still call them HDR or LDR. The masters maybe could help us here.

Anyway, here are couple of shots from 1 Raw, converted to HDR, tone mapped, and PS'd.

http://static.flickr.com/94/241563857_d0f184c487_o.jpg


http://static.flickr.com/96/239322915_f7b354af5c_o.jpg


Hope you like them. :P

Cheers!
Square

Ok, ok. After HDR and DRI, I came across with LDR. I guess this is Low Dynamic Range. In PS, you cannot merge a photo from a single Raw file that is exposure altered using your Raw editor..... unless!, unless you convert them to 16bit and save it as TIFF. try it.... :P The results are not as great as a 3 exposure jpeg or raw or tiff file. but it will do.


Eddie, Actually the approach is sound considering you want to extract every particle of tonality from a single raw file... However, on extreme cases of exposure range wherein highlights will definitely be blown or shadow data too restricted... This procedure would not be adequate enough. But for normal ranges it's doable. :Grin:

Poch, as a caveat when one wants to use the merge to HDR function in CS2... You should have used a tripod in obtaining your shots. You cannot expect perfect alignment with images taken handheld, specially if you're taking ideally 5-7 images worth of varying exposures and luminances... Something to ponder on. :Thinking:

no question about that earl, you do need a tripod. :Grin: and guess what... even with a tripod, even with mirror lock up, shooting on a windy day, you're still bound to get some - though markedly lessened - misalignments.. that's a moot point. i was simply remarking that PS could do a bit more with their align function. even canon's bundled photostitch software does a better job at alignment than CS's own stitching and alignment function: even as PS costs thousands and thousands, while photostitch is bundled with canon.:)

Ok, ok. After HDR and DRI, I came across with LDR. I guess this is Low Dynamic Range. In PS, you cannot merge a photo from a single Raw file that is exposure altered using your Raw editor..... unless!, unless you convert them to 16bit and save it as TIFF. try it.... :P The results are not as great as a 3 exposure jpeg or raw or tiff file. but it will do.

I don't know if you still call them HDR or LDR. The masters maybe could help us here.

Anyway, here are couple of shots from 1 Raw, converted to HDR, tone mapped, and PS'd.


Hope you like them. :P

Cheers!
Square


now this is a solution if you want to increase the dynamic range, and find yourself without a tripod and nothing to brace your camera with. :) ! thanks for the tip. though i think earl's right of course, it works if you just want to add a bit more, but not a lot more range...

no question about that earl, you do need a tripod. :Grin: and guess what... even with a tripod, even with mirror lock up, shooting on a windy day, you're still bound to get some - though markedly lessened - misalignments.. that's a moot point. i was simply remarking that PS could do a bit more with their align function. even canon's bundled photostitch software does a better job at alignment than CS's own stitching and alignment function: even as PS costs thousands and thousands, while photostitch is bundled with canon.:)

:Grin: No worries Poch... We should all use the tools that best suit our workflow...

Happy Shooting Bro. :)

my try at hdr. still experimenting. 3 exposures 2EVs apart.

original
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f44/jdael2005/110906/hdr%20ev%200/DSC_0674.jpg


hdr
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f44/jdael2005/110906/operahouse3hdr.jpg

Nice tonal mapping Jonathan! :)

Nice try Jonathan. Not a good image to try HDR though. The scene doesnt have that wide DR. There's also color shift on your tonemapped image. A bit reddish on my monitor. You should photograph the scene again when the clouds and lighting are more interesting.

is it reddish? i added a bit of warming filter eh.. is ur monitor calibrated?

howbout this?
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f44/jdael2005/110906/stmaryshdr.jpg

This is a lot better Jonathan. Is the church color really like that? A bit flat though. Try to increase the contrast and see if it looks better. Keep posting more! HDR can be addicting :)

thanks mitz! yup medyo ganyan nga yng kulay nya. :D
i admit flat nga hehe.. thanks! i improved the contrast already ;)

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f44/jdael2005/110906/stmaryshdr2.jpg

hehe medyo addicting nga!
here's one taken today.. medyo loud hehe..
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f44/jdael2005/111306/deewhy3hdr.jpg

Here is a hdr taken using I dont know how many shots but it was more than 3.
http://static.flickr.com/84/241272694_0e3729e93b_o.jpg

Archie, where di you take that shot? Is that Reming coming?
It's unnatural but i like it.

nope not reming I think that was taken during one of afternoon rains lang. getting ready for remming now.

ano po ung tone mapping sers ? :)

Hi Nino,

For HDR, what is the best software to do tone mapping? I cannot seem to get it right with CS2's local adaptation. Have heard of photomatix but price pretty stiff. Any suggestions?

Photomatix is so far the best for generating HDR image according to the articles and tutorials i've read over the internet.

ano po ung tone mapping sers ? :)

Tonemapping is the term used to map (downgrade/spread) the tone/range of an HDR image in order to display it in an LDR device like your monitor or print. Current monitors and all papers for printing cannot display HDR images.

There a lots of tonemapping operators available for free on the internet.
PS CS2 has 4.

If you have the budget to buy a commrecial one. I recommend the FDR Compressor by Andreas Schoeman.

www.fdrtools.com

Better than Photomatix IMHO.

Given HDR a try.. ^_^

http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/7190/dsf066312ok4.th.jpg (http://img162.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsf066312ok4.jpg)
3 images BKT +-2.0 using photomatrix (obviously.. hahah)

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/852/dscf0698yg4.th.jpg (http://img19.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dscf0698yg4.jpg)
i don't know if this is also considered HDR, but i used in-camera merging on got expsure for -3.0EV then set to manual, set iso from 400 to 100.. then 3 shots BKT +-2.0