Help needed Post-Processing an HDR Image

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spaticles

I knew what you meant, but I had already been out for the day, and had capture the images :) I figured it would have been the same effect but backwards, where it's brighter everywhere, and dark in the windows, instead of darker everywhere and bright in the windows.

---

In theory yes, but in practice you've got to be close enough to see the darker areas inside the windows, which I can't on the example you posted :(

Ok, I watched a couple videos to get some ideas on what to edit and how to edit. I attached the 0 exposure original as well as the HDR'd picture. Any improvement from the previous pictures?
I realize there's a woman ghosting in the middle of the path, but I didn't notice until I merged them, so...lol And the grass color may be a little overdone, but I really like the vibrant green.


http://i42.tinypic.com/9aw8k9.jpg
http://i43.tinypic.com/2ivxlq1.jpg

As an image in it's own right, I think it looks just fine (although perhaps a wee bit over-saturated for my taste, expecially the green), but the bit that disturbs me is when you said "I attached the 0 exposure original as well as the HDR'd picture." - if that is shot from only 1 original exposure, then - by definition - it's not an HDR image; it's simply a normal capture in which the levels have been re-mapped.

True HDR requires at least two exposures, but can't tell if that's what you meant or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

As an image in it's own right, I think it looks just fine (although perhaps a wee bit over-saturated for my taste, expecially the green), but the bit that disturbs me is when you said "I attached the 0 exposure original as well as the HDR'd picture." - if that is shot from only 1 original exposure, then - by definition - it's not an HDR image; it's simply a normal capture in which the levels have been re-mapped.

True HDR requires at least two exposures, but can't tell if that's what you meant or not.

---

What I meant is that I attached the original image that had 0 exposure, and not the two that had -2 and 2 exposure :) So yes, I used 3 exposures and merged them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spaticles

What I meant is that I attached the original image that had 0 exposure, and not the two that had -2 and 2 exposure :) So yes, I used 3 exposures and merged them.

---

Ah - OK. Good job then :)