Printable View
Hello all,
First, thanks for the HDR tutorial, it's really well written and helpful! So here are some self-portrait I did just for fun - as always. :)
Original:
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/8...oboriginal.jpg
HDR 1:
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/2...ngebobtone.jpg
HDR2:
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/5...ongebobhdr.jpg
I do prefer the natural kind of HDR photos, but extreme sttings can be fun!
Cheers,
Spongebob
Hi Spongebob - welcome to CiC. HDR imaging is, indeed, interesting and your examples show some of the possibilities, no.2 being the one I prefer. Could you tell us what software you are using? Different software can produce dramatically different results.
Cheers
David
The software used were Photomatix for the HDR processing, and Photoshop (on the 2nd pic, the eyes got some surface blur, and the background some color and blur as well).
Most of the examples on Internet feature some landscapes by nightfall, but HDR is also great for macro on object with reflective surfaces, because there is no flash involved. If that makes sense!
Anyway, great site you have here David. :cool:
Spongebob - Thanks for info. Two other pieces of software to consider are QTPFSGUI, freeware, complicated, poorly documented, but endlessly fascinating, and Dynamic-Photo HDR, commercial, not too expensive, smart, and well-documented.
BTW, "Anyway, great site you have here David." It's not my site. Wish it were. Apologise at once to McQ!!!!!
Cheers
David
Hi David,
Oops, I thought you ran the site, my bad! Sorry McQ :p
I tried tonight some night shots, and got interesting results, although the settings used were quite extreme and it looks now like a video game... oh well.
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/9281/churchdone.jpg
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/2940/nightdone.jpg
The Dynamic-Photo HDR software looks nice, is it "better" or more friendly than Photomatix? For the price, I might buy it. HDR is definitely fun, but one should not over do it. Right?!? :D
Hi Spongebob - Those two images again show the potential of HDR and neither are "over the top" (not that there is anything inherently wrong with OTT). Re Dynamic-Photo HDR software, the version I have (an early one) seems to me at least as good as Photomatix and offers extra facilities to change hue, saturation and so on. As with most choices, as I used to tell my students, try them all and see which one your happiest with. For the price, Dynamic-Photo is probably worth having in your armoury.
David