HDR Pictures

[Magnj]

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?

If I'm wrong, please do say so...

As Apache0c said, RAW does not lock down exposure settings so you can get several exposures of the same image. I don't think it's 100% ideal but certainly works as I think is fairly obvious from the picture?

[Blackstare]

You dont like bikes, just guns?

Hell yeah! Got new idea for the next photoshoot

[Apache0c]

Hell yeah! Got new idea for the next photoshoot

Is it a requirement to carry a weapon like that on the streets where you live in Guatemala?

[Cold Fussion]

As Apache0c said, RAW does not lock down exposure settings so you can get several exposures of the same image. I don't think it's 100% ideal but certainly works as I think is fairly obvious from the picture?

No it doesn't. That exposure control dialog is simply a post processing effect. It's just like the levels/brightness and contrast/exposure controls in photo shop. It is absolutely the wrong method to do HDR.

The exposure setting on the camera tells the camera shutter how long to stay open for so the light can be exposed on the CCD. The raw control doesn't magically re-expose the image by moving that slider and RAW does NOT take multiple photos to get multiple exposures for this "exposure" slider. You can go test this for yourself, go take a photo in raw and listen to the shutter, you will only hear it once!

We need a sticky to tell all you people that you can't do HDR from a single photo. Heck, its even in the name; High Dynamic Range. Using the same photo 3 times doesn't change the dynamic range! Hopefully all the 1 photo HDR bull can stop!

[Apache0c]

No it doesn't. That exposure control dialog is simply a post processing effect. It's just like the levels/brightness and contrast/exposure controls in photo shop. It is absolutely the wrong method to do HDR.

The exposure setting on the camera tells the camera shutter how long to stay open for so the light can be exposed on the CCD. The raw control doesn't magically re-expose the image by moving that slider and RAW does NOT take multiple photos to get multiple exposures for this "exposure" slider. You can go test this for yourself, go take a photo in raw and listen to the shutter, you will only hear it once!

We need a sticky to tell all you people that you can't do HDR from a single photo. Heck, its even in the name; High Dynamic Range. Using the same photo 3 times doesn't change the dynamic range! Hopefully all the 1 photo HDR bull can stop!

Man, do you drink a lot of energy drinks?

When you adjust the levels of a photo, you are effectively adjusting the exposure to suit a certain area of the image. True, this does not change shutter speed, but you are wrong if you think shutter speed is the only setting that affects exposure. There is also aperture and ISO. And if you would just read the HDR tutorials, as I said in my previous post, you can create an HDR from a RAW image at the expense of noise, you can also do it with AEB but that comes at the expense of blur. You should really ease up a bit man, you are not the end all authority on HDR.

[Nate P.]

With RAW you can make a HDR image in post processing and it does look like an HDR (with the shadows, mid-tones, and highlights exposed correctly). True, the exposure does not depend only on the shutter speed, but the aperture and ISO as well. But you cannot change those things in post processing.

Due to the nature of RAW, it captures 12 or 14 bits of color/information from the sensor, depending of your camera. JPG format only has 8 bits of color. So 3+ JPG's do have a wider tonal range than one RAW file, but that does not mean you cannot make an HDR image from one RAW.

So if you would like to make an HDR of say, action, sports, etc. a single RAW is the way to go, because it's one capture and there will be no inconsistencies with the 3 or more images (from the single HDR) causing blur. If you are making an HDR of a landscape for example, 3+ individual photos with varying shutter speeds (because varying the aperture would change the focus of the images, causing blur) would yield a better HDR because you can capture more tonal range.

[Apache0c]

I'm kinda with Cold Fussion on this one; with RAW you can make a HDR image in post processing and it does look like an HDR (with the shadows, mid-tones, and highlights exposed correctly). True, the exposure does not depend only on the shutter speed, but the aperture and ISO as well. But you cannot change those things in post processing.

Due to the nature of RAW, it captures 12 or 14 bits of color/information from the sensor, depending of your camera. JPG format only has 8 bits of color. So 3+ JPG's do have a wider tonal range than one RAW file, but that does not mean you cannot make an HDR image from one RAW.

So if you would like to make an HDR of say, action, sports, etc. a single RAW is the way to go, because it's one capture and there will be no inconsistencies with the 3 or more images (from the single HDR) causing blur. If you are making an HDR of a landscape for example, 3+ individual photos with varying shutter speeds (because varying the aperture would change the focus of the images, causing blur) would yield a better HDR because you can capture more tonal range.

Thats basically exactly what I said like three posts ago. Except for the part where you contradicted yourself by saying that you're with Cold Fussion and then saying that you can make an HDR from a RAW file.

[Jtrain43791]

this isnt HDR but i thought it looked cool anyway

[Nate P.]

Thats basically exactly what I said like three posts ago. Except for the part where you contradicted yourself by saying that you're with Cold Fussion and then saying that you can make an HDR from a RAW file.

Oh... uh... right...

Corrected!

[Apache0c]

Oh... uh... right...

Corrected!

[Blackstare]

Is it a requirement to carry a weapon like that on the streets where you live in Guatemala?

No, actually no, but with high violence rates over here it is almost a must

[Blackstare]

I don't like yellow light bulbs, photos come out with that orange-ish tone

[Blackstare]

A shot of my navigator...

[Nate P.]

I don't like yellow light bulbs, photos come out with that orange-ish tone

What are you using to process the photos? You can change the white balance to make them look more natural.

[Blackstare]

[Blackstare]

Another one, got a little noise from the screen...

[Cold Fussion]

Man, do you drink a lot of energy drinks?

When you adjust the levels of a photo, you are effectively adjusting the exposure to suit a certain area of the image. True, this does not change shutter speed, but you are wrong if you think shutter speed is the only setting that affects exposure. There is also aperture and ISO. And if you would just read the HDR tutorials, as I said in my previous post, you can create an HDR from a RAW image at the expense of noise, you can also do it with AEB but that comes at the expense of blur. You should really ease up a bit man, you are not the end all authority on HDR.

Aperture and ISO aren't post processing effects either dude. HDR is the act of combining a large amount of data into a smaller package to obtain the greatest dynamic range possible. If you simply manipulate the data as you do with raw, you aren't getting anything from doing a HDR process that you couldn't do with post processing. Doing a hdr run from 1 image is basicly a complex filter. Link me to a tutorial which states specifically that you can create new data of the scene by manipulating the data you have.

HURRY UP SOULBURNER AND GET IN THIS TOPIC SO WE DISPEL THIS STUPID 1 PICTURE HDR NONSENSE!

[Soulburner]

Cold Fussion, Dave_Sz and Nate P are right. As I explained on an earlier page with HDR we are capturing more dynamic range than is possible with one capture from the sensor. If you think an image sensor can capture an entire scene with one exposure and properly expose all lights, darks, and everything in between without losing any data to blown highlights or shadows, well let's just say a lot of companies and investors would like to speak with you. It just isn't possible with current technology. You need to expose longer to get data from the shadows, and expose shorter to keep highs from blowing out completely white. These are combined in post-processing and adjusted until you get an acceptable image.

Single-image HDR is not real HDR. It is not high dynamic range. You only have the data from one image and you cannot change it - only work with what you have. It is simply not possible and defies the purpose of HDR - to capture more detail with more exposures. All you can do with a single image is tonemapping. Tonemapping is NOT HDR. Sure with RAW you have much more adjustability, and there is some room there - but it still is not "HDR" which by definition is an image created with multiple exposures to capture a greater range of information than is possible with one image. RAW does have information to recover highlights and shadows, which is something you can't do with a JPEG image which is essentially locked and done. This can be used to create an HDR but you have no where near the dynamic range an ideal 3, 5, or 7 shot bracket will. Some people even use up to 9 though I think this is unnecessary. You know you need more exposures when you have a very large range in your scene, for example very dark areas and very bright areas together.

Apache0c had a decent example a couple pages back that shows when and why HDR imagery is necessary. Here is another.





Here is what we are focusing on in this image...hot highlights:



The red areas indicate overexposure and loss of information. If only we could have toned the exposure down a bit with a faster shutter speed...wait, we did. But then the bottom half of the church would be too dark right? We took care of that too. In the 3 images above, I exposed one image normally, one -2 stops under, and one +2 stops over to complete the dynamic range I am after. The completed image looks something like this...




Notice I have detail throughout the scene and have a properly exposed image. This is impossible for modern day digital image sensors to capture in one exposure thus the need for this process.

This is handheld btw, and a testament to Photoshop's aligning ability.

I've been refraining from typing a lot about this lately due to wrist problems so just do some research and you'll see for yourself.

[Apache0c]

Cold Fussion, Dave_Sz and Nate P are right. As I explained on an earlier page with HDR we are capturing more dynamic range than is possible with one capture from the sensor. If you think an image sensor can capture an entire scene with one exposure and properly expose all lights, darks, and everything in between without losing any data to blown highlights or shadows, well let's just say a lot of companies and investors would like to speak with you. It just isn't possible with current technology. You need to expose longer to get data from the shadows, and expose shorter to keep highs from blowing out completely white. These are combined in post-processing and adjusted until you get an acceptable image.

Single-image HDR is not real HDR. It is not high dynamic range. You only have the data from one image and you cannot change it - only work with what you have. It is simply not possible and defies the purpose of HDR - to capture more detail with more exposures. All you can do with a single image is tonemapping. Tonemapping is NOT HDR. Sure with RAW you have much more adjustability, and there is some room there - but it still is not "HDR" which by definition is an image created with multiple exposures to capture a greater range of information than is possible with one image. RAW does have information to recover highlights and shadows, which is something you can't do with a JPEG image which is essentially locked and done. This can be used to create an HDR but you have no where near the dynamic range an ideal 3, 5, or 7 shot bracket will. Some people even use up to 9 though I think this is unnecessary. You know you need more exposures when you have a very large range in your scene, for example very dark areas and very bright areas together.

Apache0c had a decent example a couple pages back that shows when and why HDR imagery is necessary. Here is another.





Here is what we are focusing on in this image...hot highlights:



The red areas indicate overexposure and loss of information. If only we could have toned the exposure down a bit with a faster shutter speed...wait, we did. But then the bottom half of the church would be too dark right? We took care of that too. In the 3 images above, I exposed one image normally, one -2 stops under, and one +2 stops over to complete the dynamic range I am after. The completed image looks something like this...




Notice I have detail throughout the scene and have a properly exposed image. This is impossible for modern day digital image sensors to capture in one exposure thus the need for this process.

This is handheld btw, and a testament to Photoshop's aligning ability.

I've been refraining from typing a lot about this lately due to wrist problems so just do some research and you'll see for yourself.

I appreciate your work. However, I do think there is a slight contradiction in what you say. For instance, you mentioned my example, and my example was done with only one jpeg image. Yet I still improved the exposure throughout the image using photoshop level adjustment along with photomatix image merge and tone mapping. When someone uses the phrase "true HDR" they're getting into semantics. High dynamic range is a technique used to increase the range of exposure. Exposure of an image in post processing and the exposure setting of a camera have the same basic effect. Yet with every operation there is always a trade off. If you increase the settings of your camera to gain greater exposure, whether it be flash, iso, aperture, or shutter speed, you may lose detail due to blowout in hotspot areas. The same goes for post processing with the added increase of noise in the image. Either way, if you use image merge to increase the amount of properly exposed areas of a photograph, you have created an HDR image. Like I said before, there are better and worse ways to obtain the images to be merged. I'm not at all denying that a still subject shot with AEB set to -3 and +3 will net more detail than a RAW image. But sometimes you dont have a still subject, in this case you can still use the RAW image to increase the dynamic range of exposure through image merge. When you say "true HDR", what you really mean is "highest image quality HDR."

[Cold Fussion]

You are wrong mate. Post processing exposure simply manipulates the data you already have and if you have an area of total black or total white, no amount of PP is going to bring back the image there!

[Nate P.]

You are wrong mate. Post processing exposure simply manipulates the data you already have and if you have an area of total black or total white, no amount of PP is going to bring back the image there!

Well, with RAW you can usually bring back some of the underexposed, but really you want to nail it the first time, when you take the picture.

[Soulburner]

I appreciate your work. However, I do think there is a slight contradiction in what you say. For instance, you mentioned my example, and my example was done with only one jpeg image.

You stated that you used 3 images (the ball) off of the Wikipedia site. Are we talking about the same thing? I chose it since it's a nice result and you have more dynamic range in that scene than normal.

High dynamic range is a technique used to increase the range of exposure. Exposure of an image in post processing and the exposure setting of a camera have the same basic effect.

Wrong...these are not the same. You cannot create new data, only work with what you have. You have some leeway with RAW but you are still very limited compared to actually changing the exposure! Ask any photographer this. Changing exposure optically is completely different than changing it digitally.

I'm not at all denying that a still subject shot with AEB set to -3 and +3 will net more detail than a RAW image. But sometimes you dont have a still subject, in this case you can still use the RAW image to increase the dynamic range of exposure through image merge.

This is true, because of the need for still overlapping images, you can't do true HDR with a moving subject. Most of us shoot in RAW anyway (or at least you should, if you can) so this isn't a problem

When you say "true HDR", what you really mean is "highest image quality HDR."

No I mean true HDR, as in actually merging multiple exposures, not tonemapping a single image which are entirely different processes.

You are wrong mate. Post processing exposure simply manipulates the data you already have and if you have an area of total black or total white, no amount of PP is going to bring back the image there!

Correct

Well, with RAW you can usually bring back some of the underexposed, but really you want to nail it the first time, when you take the picture.

Also correct, RAW saves all of the data from the sensor for you to later manipulate. Compressing to JPEG literally throws away all of that exposure data and nothing can be recovered. Still you only have what you captured and outside of that range you are going to need to take more images to increase the range (bracketing).

[Got_Vtec?]

I have been looking into HDR pictures for quite sometime now and while i was searching for the best programs to use i was told Photoshop CS3 is a good program but if you want to use one photo instead of the 3 you can use Light Room as well, I have the settings needed saved in a document on my main computer, I am on my laptop now....once i go upstairs I will post up for those interested.

really nice pics btw!!

[Apache0c]

You stated that you used 3 images (the ball) off of the Wikipedia site. Are we talking about the same thing? I chose it since it's a nice result and you have more dynamic range in that scene than normal.

Wrong...these are not the same. You cannot create new data, only work with what you have. You have some leeway with RAW but you are still very limited compared to actually changing the exposure! Ask any photographer this. Changing exposure optically is completely different than changing it digitally.

This is true, because of the need for still overlapping images, you can't do true HDR with a moving subject. Most of us shoot in RAW anyway (or at least you should, if you can) so this isn't a problem

No I mean true HDR, as in actually merging multiple exposures, not tonemapping a single image which are entirely different processes.


Correct

Also correct, RAW saves all of the data from the sensor for you to later manipulate. Compressing to JPEG literally throws away all of that exposure data and nothing can be recovered. Still you only have what you captured and outside of that range you are going to need to take more images to increase the range (bracketing).

You're right about the Wikipedia image, I was mistaken, my apologies.

You will lose image data when you adjust the levels of an image during post processing, I'm not denying that.

However, you can still increase the visibility of some detail through adjusting levels in post process.

And different levels may work better or worse for differently exposed areas of the image.

And if you adjust the levels for several different areas each saved as a different image, and use photomatix image merge. The image may have less actual detail, but it still has a more even exposure.

[Metric]

Just came back from being in Hawai'i for a week. Taken down at South Point. HDR processing done in CS3. More to come as 3 hours of jet-lag isn't fun -_-