Qtpfsgui HDR - Any Interest?

[David]

I've been playing with HDR software with the ungainly name of Qtpfsgui (http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net) which I call "Cutiepie" for ease of reference. I would be interested to hear of anyone else's experience of this system. It is open source and provides numerous blending algorithms as well as a large and somewhat confusing array of tone mapping options. One feature that may be of general interest is that the HDR images that can be generated often (well, always in my hands) have much larger dynamic ranges than those gerenated with, for example, Photomatix Pro (which does not provide as many options). Cutiepie's HDR files can, of course, be saved and then processed with other tone mapping software. Is achieving a maximum or at least greater dynamic range a desirable thing to do? Or should the user stick with the algorithm embedded in Photomatix Pro (or whatever)?

David

PS If you're downloading, make sure you get the stable version of Cutiepie v1.8.12, the later versions seem unstable.

[Benny Pedersen]

Originally Posted by David

I've been playing with HDR software with the ungainly name of Qtpfsgui (http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net) which I call "Cutiepie" for ease of reference. I would be interested to hear of anyone else's experience of this system. It is open source and provides numerous blending algorithms as well as a large and somewhat confusing array of tone mapping options. One feature that may be of general interest is that the HDR images that can be generated often (well, always in my hands) have much larger dynamic ranges than those gerenated with, for example, Photomatix Pro (which does not provide as many options). Cutiepie's HDR files can, of course, be saved and then processed with other tone mapping software. Is achieving a maximum or at least greater dynamic range a desirable thing to do? Or should the user stick with the algorithm embedded in Photomatix Pro (or whatever)?

David

PS If you're downloading, make sure you get the stable version of Cutiepie v1.8.12, the later versions seem unstable.

I got very bad results with that "thing", example:

The one to the left is fattal algorithm, and the other is mantiuk algorithm.
In other words, Photomatix Pro + your adjustments would be much better.

Benny
www.fineraw.com

[David]

Hi Benny
Your experience and examples mirror my own when using the different tone mapping options in"cutipie". At the moment my main use for this software is to generate HDR files to be tone-mapped by Photomatix. However, I guess that anyone interested in producing exaggerated effects might find some of the tone-mapping routines in "cutipie" useful. In addition, those interested in the theory behind HDR and tone-mapping will find some powerful papers by following the links or Googling the the various authors.

David

[Chatanooga]

I use qtfpfsgui, however I do prefer to get the "painted" look rather than a realistic look.

A few examples

[David]

Hi Chatanooga
What brilliant images; I especially like the ghosts in No. 4. You don't say what tone-mapping options you have used. I would be interested to hear about those. BTW, geographically, the images are not that far away from my locale. Maybe you know MMU?

David

[Chatanooga]

Tone mapping settings for above images. All taken with a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ7 and tripod. I have just upgraded to a Canon EOS-450 so hoping to get some nicer results soon.

Image 1.
5 x tiffs
Qtpfsgui 1.8.12 tonemapping parameters:
Operator: Mantiuk
Parameters:
Contrast Equalization
Saturation Factor: 0.8
------
PreGamma: 1


Image 2.
5 x tiffs
Qtpfsgui 1.8.12 tonemapping parameters:
Operator: Mantiuk
Parameters:
Contrast Mapping factor: 0.1
Saturation Factor: 0.8
------
PreGamma: 1


Image 3.
5 x Tiffs
Qtpfsgui 1.8.12 tonemapping parameters:
Operator: Mantiuk
Parameters:
Contrast Mapping factor: 0.3
Saturation Factor: 0.8
------
PreGamma: 1


Image 4.
5 x Tiffs
Qtpfsgui 1.8.12 tonemapping parameters:
Operator: Mantiuk
Parameters:
Contrast Mapping factor: 0.1
Saturation Factor: 1.2
------
PreGamma: 1