you can get it in a 3870x2602 :P
i went back to it and played with it a bit:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/...a077235f07.jpg[click for full size]
Printable View
you can get it in a 3870x2602 :P
i went back to it and played with it a bit:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3239/...a077235f07.jpg[click for full size]
Now we're talking. I always thought it was too dark :up:
many thanks i liked the one before but just wasnt big enough, its now my new wallpaper. Many Thanks!:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by hieuhef
it was :D. and my monitor was calibrated with another broken pantone huey pro.. so besides the magenta cast, it was uber dark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner
i should have known when i had to blast the gamma in cod4 and css.
[edit] and you're welcome jtrain! it's awesome knowing people enjoy your work :P
Holy :banana::banana::banana::banana:, now that is a kickass photo!
:D Anytime i love my new wallpaper it makes my desktop look sexy :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by hieuhef
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i1...untitled-1.jpg
oh, you can crop out the white, jtrain, i forgot why i put it there [unless you like it that way :D]
Hehe, the white makes my 20" seem like its 24" because the photo is so big
Hey Everyone first off AMAZING pictures! This is my first post as well as my first attempt at HDR. This picture was taken with a Kodak Z650 Point and shoot :( I know its kodak and sucky BUT its all i have(cant afford much else im a poor student lol) and i work with what i have. Luckily though Next month I will be Upgrading to he Nikon D40, So Im pretty excited about that :) Anywho Heres my first attempt at HDR, I know its not great but thats why im here, Any and All Advice is Welcomed and appreciated.
Here is the Original Image:
http://i37.tinypic.com/vq2zb9.jpg
And here is the HDR, I used a trial Version of Photomatix, but im working on getting a license :)
http://i35.tinypic.com/w0rlu8.jpg
I hope to have more pictures soon with your advice :)
WAY over-saturated, and the subject matter isn't all that great either.
The original image is 10 fold better. You also CANNOT do HDR with one picture :\ The original photo wouldn't look much better if it was a proper hdr since it seems perfectly exposed.
Alright well it seems like i chose the wrong subject to attempt an hdr. I will try again once day light comes around. Any more tips on how to improve are greatly appreciated :)
noiseeeeee :(
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...C08721_2_3.jpg
Nice background unrealer, can u send me a hi res version plz. zhangmaster12@gmail.com.
Thnks.
Who is it by the way?
I just started playing with it. I used the images on Wikipedia for practice:
Exposure: 3
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...FTP/HDRI/1.jpg
Exposure: 0
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...FTP/HDRI/2.jpg
Exposure: -4
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...FTP/HDRI/3.jpg
Tone Mapped
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...FTP/HDRI/4.jpg
The first three images are off the Wikipedia article, the last one is the HDR I generated with Photomatix. You can see that the tone mapped image has detail in the sky reflection on the orb along with more color in the bricks in the background that wasnt present in the regular exposure. I used Photomatix Pro v3.
I know this is an old post but, isn't that the absolute wrong way to go about HDR? You're supposed to have multiple original pictures of the exact same thing. One proper exposure, one darker exposure for shadows, and one light exposure for highlights. You can't get all that from just one RAW pic can you? Isn't the point of HDR, the fact that the camera's dynamic range is too small? So in one shot you CAN'T get the shadows and highlights that you would get if you took separate shots aimed at shadows and highlights. Then you overlap them and get the full range your camera was not able to get in one shot. Or can you edit the RAW image to pull out the shadows and highlights?Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnj
If I'm wrong, please do say so...
Yes, you can get that from one RAW image file. RAW files are not compressed and they dont lock exposure information so you can adjust it after the shot. It explains this in the tutorial "there are two main ways to obtain the images needed for HDR, AEB and RAW"Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Sz
AEB has the benefit of low noise at the expense of blur, RAW has the benefit of sharpness at the expense of noise. It's all in the tutorials...
And honestly, with a high enough resolution image and noise reduction software, you can still get decent results with the jpeg trick. You're right that HDR is all about combining images to increase dynamic range but there is always more than one way to skin a cat.
Quick first attempt, bit dark IMO..
Taken With: Panasonic TZ5
Focal Length: 4.7mm Exposure Time: 0.033 s (1/30)
Aperture: f/3.3 ISO Equiv.: 320
http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s...0033789zd0.jpg
any attempt i have tried with HDR never worked for me, guess i need more prative or i am far too picky..
Gear
Canon 40D
17-85 IS
Canon 60mm Macro
nifty 50
430 ex flash
i got the gear, but i think i am far tooooooo picky of my own work
I guess you did the HDR wrong then, because the point of HDR is to expose every part of the photo well.Quote:
Originally Posted by foR
Warning, big picture... I did't want to resize it, it looks so damn good, sorry...
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/2...hdrcopyij4.jpg
^Yeah man, that is damn good. Is that your bike?
No, I don't like bikes, that's from my sister's boyfriend...
Thanks for the encouraging feedback.. The shot itself was taken in very dark conditions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate P.
Bad weather here is preventing me from any nice days with sun or any chance at all go capture anything but gray..
You dont like bikes, just guns? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackstare