I've been experimenting with HDR, and honestly, I don't know which is better. The image on the far left is by far the worst. It's what the HDR image looked like fresh out of Photomatix. But then I ran some levels, curves, and coloring to make it look less flat. Which made the image in the center.The image on the far right is one of the exposures that went into making the HDR image, only with some levels, curves, and coloring added in photoshop.So /p/, in all your expertise, which image is better, the HDR image or the not HDR image?EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A85Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:04:23 14:46:58Exposure Time1/20 secF-Numberf/2.8Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias2 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.41 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1691Image Height420RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
You're doing it wrong. HDR is useful for images that have a broad brightness range that doesn't fit in a single exposure, but your non-HDR picture on the right already doesn't have any significant underexposed or overexposed areas.
I prefer the non HDR one because it preserves the curve of the celing. The middle one almost looks like a flat wall.
HDR could have helped to get more detail in the windows, but they're still overexposed in the left shot. Other than that the original one looks best.You fail at HDR.
i like the middle one.only because it looks like a 3d render though