HDR of moving subjects

[mrinmoyvk]

Capturing multiple images with exposure bracketing for moving subjects is difficult and might give rise to ghosts while merging. My question is

"Is there any difference in
1. capturing 3 images in AE bracketing and merging those later to create HDR image and
2. capturing 1 image without exposure compensation, creating 2 more images by adjusting exposure with +ve and -ve values in post processing and then merging those three images to create HDR image?"

[proseak]

What software do you use to create your HDR images?

[mrinmoyvk]

What software do you use to create your HDR images?

Photoshop CS6 extended, first I convert all NEFs to DNGs; then create HDR image from three DNGs

[Black Pearl]

What are you wanting to photograph that has a dynamic range so large that loosing detail in the highlights/shadows is spoiling your shots?

[proseak]

So, I'm guessing that you select the dng files in Bridge, then Tools>Photoshop>Merge to HDR Pro? If so, there is a check-box marked "Remove ghosts". You may find that helps...

[Donald]

"Is there any difference in
1. capturing 3 images in AE bracketing and merging those later to create HDR image and
2. capturing 1 image without exposure compensation, creating 2 more images by adjusting exposure with +ve and -ve values in post processing and then merging those three images to create HDR image?"

The second of these is not application of the HDR technique. It is creating 3 files with the exposure rating varied. HDR is and only is, the capture of more than one photograph and varying exposure settings when the dynamic range of light is too great to capture in one image, folllowed by the blending of those photographs to make one image. Anything else is not application of the HDR technique.

[pnodrog]

What is the subject matter and does it have the high dynamic range or is the background the cause of the high dynamic range?

For example if you take a bird in flight photograph and take the bird with the correct exposure for it and once it has gone take a photograph with the correct exposure for the sky then they can be merged.

The hardest problem (impossible?) is with a HDR subject moving erratically or with parts moving at different speeds.

[mrinmoyvk]

The second of these is not application of the HDR technique. It is creating 3 files with the exposure rating varied. HDR is and only is, the capture of more than one photograph and varying exposure settings when the dynamic range of light is too great to capture in one image, folllowed by the blending of those photographs to make one image. Anything else is not application of the HDR technique.

Agree that 2nd is not application of HDR technique but can it be workaround for it.

I will re-frame my question below.

Is there huge difference between capturing the image with -1 exposure compensation in camera and reducing the exposure of normal RAW file by -1 in post processing? In both cases, we are adjusting only exposure compensation, first in camera while capturing and second in PS after capturing.

[Black Pearl]

If all you are doing is faking an under/over exposed file by using the RAW data then the detail is in the file and you don't need HDR to tweak it out. Proper, and careful processing of the RAW file is all that you need to do.
You need actual multiple exposures from the camera when the dynamic range of your scene is so great a single file can't capture it.

[chauncey]

Quick answer, IMHO, no.

But it must be said that I'm not a big fan of HDR imaging in it's truest sense
(blending numerous exposures).
I much prefer to do my exposure adjusting in PP using various adjustment layers and
brushes along with using HDR Toning and Shadows/Highlights tools.

[proseak]

I shall try this again; my last post just disappeared into the ether... twice

Try the three shot approach, then putting the middle one on top and painting in the bits you want, either using masks, or just erasing.

[FrankMi]

Hi Mrinmoy, depending upon your control of the shooting situation, there are techniques you could apply.

Lets assume the at moving parts of the scene are controllable, such as a person or vehicle at your command. Also, lets assume that the dynamic range is such that HDR techniques are the best way to capture the static parts of the image. You could then shoot the multiple exposure scene without the moving subject to capture the background, then shoot a subject specific single exposure capture in the scene.

In post processing you merge the HDR images to get the background, then, using layers and masking, add the moving subject to the HDR scene in the exact location that it was when the subject was captured.

Another approach is to capture the multiple exposure images, ensuring that the moving subject in the normal exposure image was exactly where you wanted them in the final image. Then, rather than use HDR tonemapping techniques, use layers and masking to blend the images. In most cases, the parts of the image that have muddy shadow detail and blown-out highlights are in different parts of the image so the exposure blending can be seamless even with a moving subject.

[rpcrowe]

I am also not a great fan of the HDR technique. This may be a solution to your question: NIK software can mimic HDR compositing using a single image in their HDR2 filter.

Here is an image SOOC with absolutely no processing except resizing and conversion to JPEG


Here is that image modified with NIK HDR2 filter at default values...


Here is the SOOC image modified in a standard fashion using levels and NIK Viveza control points...