There seams to have been a bit of an explosion recently on people dabbling with HDR photography with a lesser or greater degree of success. It can be a great tool if it’s used right but it’s important to remember it isn’t a wonder treatment for any image and is intended really to maximise detail in shots that have contrasting and difficult lighting rather than one size fits all treatment. There are two main ways it can achieved - by taking a single raw shot and altering the exposure bracketing in your raw converter (good for fast moving subjects) or the preferred way which is to take 3 separate RAW shots at the scene with different exposures. This seams to render the best results as they have more detail and less noise on the image and provide a truer representation of the scene. Most photographers tend to do this by using a tripod and adjusting their cameras auto bracketing by plus or minus 2. I found a few quite good tutorials on this linked below, so hopefully that will be helpful for you.


Tutorial 1 and Tutorial 2.

Phil ,are you trying to make me crawl into the nearest hole? lol - I do not have a RAW facility with my camera - I tried it using differently exposed "unRAW" shots.
I thought I just had to do the auto bracket thing. I have tried it several times - some went straight to the bin and others I believe were enhanced, but they will never see the light of day.
I did not know they were supposed to be RAW so I have learned a valuable lesson, thank you. I could of course blame my abyssmal results on his :)
Those tutorials are good, thanks. Will keep them for when I upgrade my camera. I need a tripod too.
No matter what the result I think it is good to experiment with different techniques, and the VB soon gives an indication orf their success - or otherwise :)

Thanks Phil. I was looking at the last DigiCamMan's HDR images and I needed informations about it... :-)

JPGs should do fine with HDR. IMHO, HDR is used too often when it doesn't need to be; it also has a certain flatness that i'm not too fond of.

...however, this is fun to look at if you're in the mood for something different. ;-)

And, thanks for the tutorial. I was looking for a resonable tutorial last weekened.

Looking at DigiCamMan's HDR images I do not see them as flat Noah, in fact some of them seem almost 3D.
Can someone enlighten me as to whether RAW format is essential for successful HDR - are you saying it isn't Noah? I am now confused - I guess it matters not - I shall keep on fiddling with it anyway :)

RAW is convenient for HDR .. not essential

the reason being (one of them) .. is that ONE shot can be used for the THREE images processed for the effect .. but, as Phil points out, this brings with it noise\grain from over amping the exposure

see .. (HDR) tutorial .. by .. CSP

the program used in this tutorial is a TRIAL version .. and, according to ZAC's results the trial still works for accomplishing this effect .... Photoshop can also do this natively (the feature is "hidden" in the file menu)

I have been using Easy HDR Basic, free version, from here
http://www.easyhdr.com/download.php#free
I use OptikVerve Virtual Photographer to alter the exposure on the same image.
I do not think I will ever master it properly - maybe best left the experts.

an expert is just somebody who stopped implying they weren't an expert

:o)

from what I have read - if you are not going to use RAW it is best to remove any exif data from the images before you process them for HDR - there are many ways to do this - the simplest perhaps being to just copy and paste them into new blank documents.

for those of you with a version of Photoshop with the HDR function - there is a set of three images in the samples folder that is a demo of the merge to HDR function - they are a good guideline as to the range of bracketed orginals you should be starting with.

I am interesting on this subject.
I will take time to study this.
Thanks to open my eyeis...

I'm guessing this will all become redundant in the near future anyways as most camera manufacturers are moving towards building in HDR capabilities into the camera software itself. Fuji's twin sensor set up has always yielded the best dynamic range in the business but now the likes of sony are introducing pre PMA launches of new compacts featuring dynamic range enhancement built in as well, HD output, 12MP sensors, face detection, built in creative filtering blah blah.

....what does the photographer do when the camera does all of that?

sit on their thumb and have a coffee from the tartan thermos flask and then post their synthetically generated masterpieces with the 'no photoshop postwork' badge of honour I imagine :-)

that's kind of why I like the Sigma SD14 - built like a tank, great dynamic range from its three sensors, high noise free resolution and absolutely no presets or flashy in camera trickery.

Sigma? ... does that come as a prize in a Cracker Jack box?

oh, wait .. I remember .. it was one of those kits in Popular Mechanics magazine

im guessing that would be Cracker Jacks dusted with gold that give you a $1600 camera for free :-)

yes .. it breaks your teeth .. but nobody complains much

Tip of the Day...Don't overdue it;-)

the HDR or the Cracker Jacks?

But Wait! There is more...if you order now we will also include a Bejeweler.