Anonymous
Can someone please explain HDR to me?
Someone showed me some HDR images, and they completely blew me away.
Any HDR pics you have yourself would also be appreciated
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:01:26 00:25:53Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width864Image Height1200
>> Anonymous
obvious, etc..
>> (:)-
From what I understand, an HDR picture is actually 3+ pictures taken with different exposure settings. There's a normal one, a dark one, and a bright one, then you use a program or something and SCIENCE! all 3 pictures together to accent the colors, lighting, and PRETTY in the normal one.

I'll let someone who knows what they're talking about explain, actually.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
HDR = high dynamic range

DSLR has limited dynamic range, only a small set of light and dark per shot. Combine more than one to give a greater dynamic range to a photo.

Used correctly producing more natural images!
>> Anonymous
anon sucks.

the human eye can see light areas, mid-tone AND dark areas at the same time (thats why eyes still kicks ass)
that would be what HDR is..

but cameras are gay, they can see only mid-tones and light areas OR mid-tones and dark areas
therefore their dynamic range of light (DR) is limited

when you take a picture with light areas, one with midtone (actually not needed) and a picture with dark areas, and combine them....you have almost what the human eye can see....thus HDR

there...
>> Anonymous
what program would i need, and I would use autobracket?
>> Anonymous
>>152011
Actually, true HDR surpasses human range.
>> M/A !n21TE7QU8U
>>152012
Photoshop and yes, you will use bracketing.
Unless you're a slomo and wanna do it manually.
>> Anonymous
>>152012
A Program called Photomatix works pretty well too.
>> Anonymous
I'm guessing you can't do this w/o a tripod?
>> Anonymous
>>152112
what type of settings would i need iso etc, what type of autobracketing
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>152170
You can, Vincent can do it, so long as you have a steady enough hand if you crop the photos all slightly you will be able to get a perfect lineup. If you dont do it correctly you get some slightly noticable effects.

>>152173
Your cameras base iso provides the highest dynamic range but you can use any, setting the autobrackets to be as far appart as possible will give you the greatist range once its combined.
>> Anonymous
HDR is high dynamic range. In photography, this range is measured in units of 'stops', which refers to each increment of an f-stop, a shutter fraction, or ISO step (you will need a full understanding of photography to get that). At any rate, a typical full stop range of any scene to human eye is 10 stops. Film cameras get a range of about 4-5 stops. Digital cameras get a range of about 3-4 stops. These are not precise, but you get the idea. At the 1st stop is absolute black. At the 10th stop is absolute white. If you have a scene that goes beyond the stop range of a digital camera, you can use HDR, which takes images taken at different stop ranges and combines them into one image. HDR can be done either through HDR merging (found in photoshop or other software) or simple cut-and-pasting (also found in photoshop).
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>152177

Multiply those twice and we are much nearer the truth.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dynamic-range.htm
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
example of HDR.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/3.5Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:03:30 02:29:55Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/6.3Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/6.3Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashFlash, Compulsory, Red-Eye ReduceFocal Length18.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>152566
So is this supposed to teach us not to HDR, shitty pic's?
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
>>152566
lol, not even close:
clipped whites and blacks...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>152815
I kinda like this shot.

PNG is fail in this context, though.
>> Anonymous
Protip: The image formats that are supported on this board do not have a high enough colour depth to display HDRI.
If someone would make a true HDR image and save it to OpenEXR or something, then we'd see what it really is.

Visit here: http://www.debevec.org/Probes/ for REAL hdr images, viewable in HDRshop (provided there) or pretty much any 3d rendering app worth it's salt, and possibly even Photoshop (i dont know for sure).

You can't see the full dynamic range of the images, since your monitor is bound to 24bit/pixel at a maximum, and are usually much less in practise, but HDRshop will allow you to dynamically change the image exposure level, letting you view the entire dynamic range, in the bracketed range of your monitor.
>> Anonymous
>>152828

Those HDR files are viewable in PS, with a little exposure slider on the bottom of the image window.

The point is, they just look like different photos of different exposures, and not like ass, like all of the "HDR" photos we usually see posted here.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>152828
>Protip: The image formats that are supported on this board do not have a high enough colour depth to display HDRI.
Amateur-who-actually-knows-what-he's-talking-about-tip: An actual HDR image has too much information to be displayed on current monitor technologies (and, probably, forseeable future monitor technologies). When people say something is an HDR, they mean it's a tonemapped image from an HDR source. Just like when you say you're looking at a photo in an art gallery, you're actually looking at a print of a photo.
>> Anonymous
>>152839

Learn2read, douchebag, I already said that.

Btw, there are 32bit capable monitors out there, they're just fucking expensive.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>152851
Oh, hey, so you did. Sorry about that.
>> Anonymous
>>152851
>32bit monitors

Link?
>> Anonymous
>>152869
Disregard, we both suck cocks.

Me for forgetting 32bit color is standard and you for acting like it's a big deal.
>> Anonymous
>>152869

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2005/10/03/brightside_hdr_edr/1

True 48bit colour panel, RRP $49,000.

It basically gets the extreme colour depth by having an exceptionally good backlight, with zero light leakage with "black" pixels, and perfect "white" pixels, without effecting the surrounding pixel colour.