File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hi guise

is it normal that i find the non hdr shot prettier than the hdr shots?

Or the guy does not know how to make hdr shots?

Also is there any alternative to CS2 or 3 to merge photos to make HDR shots? I just want to try, i don't want to pay shitload of money for trying.


kthxbye.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 2.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:12:31 17:36:26Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1559Image Height1000
>> Anonymous
terrible troll is terrible.
>> Anonymous
>>106763
not a troll fucktard

But in the example of photos i uploaded, i find the non hdr shot better. I have seen hdr shot here: http://www.hdrsoft.com/index.html the eiffel tower, and oh fuck it's so sexy.

Is there any free software or does all the free software do shitty pictures?
>> Anonymous
also is what is said here true:

http://www.supportingcomputers.net/Applications/Artizen/Comparisons.htm
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>106759
>is it normal that i find the non hdr shot prettier than the hdr shots?
No. In fact, you probably should schedule a visit with your optometrist and psychologist soon, because that's an indication of a severe mental problem, the first stages of blindness, or both. HDR automatically makes everything better.

>>106763
This doesn't look like a troll to me. He's asking an honest question.

(And, for the record, my response to him is a joke, not a troll)
>> Anonymous
Seriously there isn't a simple software that only merges picture to make a HDR pic? All that i see are software collection that seems overpriced, and full of stuff i won't use. I just want a HDR software, because pictures like that look better
>> Anonymous
>>106859

There's probably something open source that would do it. I've confidence in the fine geniuses of the internet.
>> Anonymous
i think i found what i wanted

http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2007/12/how_to_hdr_photography_in.html
>> Anonymous
well infact this one seems better

http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net/#screenshots
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OK op here i used photomatix aand i will try with Qtpfsgui in the future.

Here is my first decent hdr shot

tell me how it is please
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
this is what i worked with

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 300D DIGITALCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 2.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.6Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:01:01 04:37:23Exposure Time1/1250 secF-Numberf/9.0ISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/9.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeAverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2048Image Height1360RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
i'm a newb can someone explain what HDR is?
>> Anonymous
>>106970

you take 3 pictures

you put it in HDR image merger

you click ok

you move sliders

and you enjoy your unrealistic but interesting and arousing shot
>> Anonymous
>>106970

also see the eiffel tower

http://www.hdrsoft.com/index.html
>> Anonymous
you need to have contrast, black and white in a photo to add dramatic tension. if we accept academic painting as our aesthetic model, then potographers should be working towards a decreased dynamic range, not an increased. painters break up their tonal scale into ten distinct values, then choose to work with 3 or 4. 6 values is muddy, 10 leaves the eye wandering.

on the other hand, you could argue that the strength of photography is its exploration between values 1 and 10. A good black and white print has thousands of different shades of grey; the tendency in photo school is to train your eye and your technique to shoot and print more values than just black, white and muddy grey. the big difference between a master's print and a freshman's is the subtle tonality.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>106984

continued.

on the other hand, the color in hdr shots typically look muddy to me. clouds look awful, and everything has that weird dark halo around it. that just might a matter of technique and a reliance on sliders rather than doing it by hand. it's my opinion that real hdr should be done by manually compositing the elements into the photo. layer blending, etc.

there is some well-done hdr out there, and when it is well-done, it transcends a single photo with 5 stops of information. like so:

http://www.unit16.net/panoramas.htm

this is a local photographer who makes great photos. there's actually more going on here than just hdr, (like stitching together 30 photos for a single print) but it's a good example of hdr done very, very well. the guy's my new hero; he also won an oscar (actually, three) for inventing the motion control camera system they used in star wars and about six million movies after.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsPhotographerBill TondreauImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:07:12 21:18:37Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width1180Image Height581
>> Anonymous
Spoilers: 100% of the images posted here are not HDR.
>> Anonymous
>>106986
>>106984
dont insult my work


i will cry
>> Anonymous
>>106859
Simple. It's called piracy. Get CS3 off torrents, there has to be 500 of them. Check piratebay, where I got it.
>> Anonymous
>>107100
>>107100

IT MIGHT SOUND A LITTLE FUN TO YOU
BUT I DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH DISK SPACE LOL
>> Anonymous
>>106988

Correctemundo. HDR and tone-mapped images (what people around these parts refer to as HDR) are not the same thing.
>> Anonymous
>>107338
>>106988
Same person. Also, are you trying to say that these tone-mapped images don't have a high dynamic range in comparison to regular photos?
>> Anonymous
HDR is stupid as hell.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>107410
It's useful in situations where the contrast among the elements is so strong that you can't capture the entire range of luminance in one photograph. I took an HDR picture of myself sitting at the computer where there were about 8 stops of difference between my body and the stuff on my desk (60W lamp and computer LCD) and it looked pretty natural in my opinion. If you don't over do it, there isn't a problem, and most people probably wouldn't know the difference.
>> Anonymous
>>107407

That is correct. High dynamic range means there is more information inside the image. With tone-mapping you're just using the extra data inside the image to tweak the levels and give you a prettier picture (in theory anyways), and then saving the result to a non-hdr format like jpeg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging

You could always just read that.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera ModelFinePix S5700 S700Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:01:03 19:37:24F-Numberf/3.5ISO Speed Rating64Focal Length6.70 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1013Image Height760
>> Anonymous
>>107427
so tonmapping is off one picture, and HDR is off 3 or moar pics right
>> Anonymous
>>108032
needs moar salsa
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I only tried one HDR shot. Not that impressed really. If the shot does not stand up on it's own I don't much point.
>> Anonymous
HDR is a way to compress high dynamic range shots into one shot, and the rest of that crap with oversaturated colors and auras are just.. well... horrible photography.

Proper use of HDR is something like you have a subject in a heavily shaded area, thats the focus of your composition, and you have a bright background. With HDR you can capture both, and make it look right.

Secondly, you could use it to keep more shadow detail. There are more details captures in the higher part of the dynamic range than the lower part...
>> Anonymous
>>108354

Um, that looks fucking ugly. And the trees aren't even in focus.
>> Anonymous
>>108354
at least use the bracketing feature on ur SLR (so you dont move the camera every time you fucking change the exposure)
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Oh hi op here what you think of this more natural shot

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Elements 2.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2008:01:02 01:50:59Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width2048Image Height1355
>> yam
     File :-(, x)
here is my attempt at HDR using the auto script in PSCS3, i also fiddled around with some filters to sharpened and to add effects to the lighting (but not much) it has taken me a few goes to get a picture that actually looks good in HDR ( i have tried a few different subjects as well)

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:01:05 13:34:12Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width3068Image Height2212
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>108388
REZ FUCKING IMAGE

also hdr of a boring shot is still boring.
>> yam
>>108392ur right, im just happy that is look ok, my other try's looked like turd (not literally), lots of ghosts and the lighting was off
>> Anonymous
>>108354
has it right

HDR is simply a way of dealing with the fact that in digital cameras, you have at most about 4000 intensity values. HDR in principle doubles, tripples, on increases your intensity resolution by however much you want. Like most things in photography, it's simply a tool. How you use it is what makes the photo. Remember when solar flare was cruise control for cool? Well now it's HDR. Each has its place and uses, no more, no less.