Landscape
 

Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I think I
was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements 11.

If you feel like commenting, that'd be great. (I'll try to curb my tendency
to ask excessive questions.)

Take Care,
Dudley

Landscape
 

Dudley Hanks wrote:
Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I
think I was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements
11.
If you feel like commenting, that'd be great. (I'll try to curb my
tendency to ask excessive questions.)

Take Care,
Dudley

You've got my disease. It needs to be rotated clockwise, the smokestacks,
tall buildings etc all lean left. My subjective impression is that the
image is rather bland. Whether this is due to your processing I cannot say,
the buildings interspersed with the trees is more interesting to me than the
grass and weeds in the foreground.

David

Landscape
 

On 2013-06-23 19:21:44 -0700, "Dudley Hanks" said:

Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I
think I was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.

What do you mean by "quasiHDR"?

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements 11.

That is a start, but just combining the bracket set with PSE11 does not
make it any sort of HDR.
Your result is bland and no better than the WB problem shot, HDR
doesn't really seem to be needed.
If you are going to process the 5 shot bracket as an HDR you will need
at a minimum the Photoshop "merge to HDR" feature or dedicated HDR
software such as Photomatix or NIK HDR Efex Pro2.

If you care to post the 5 shots from your HDR bracket and I would be
happy to see what I can get from them.

If you feel like commenting, that'd be great. (I'll try to curb my
tendency to ask excessive questions.)

Take Care,
Dudley


--
Regards,

Savageduck

Landscape
 

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message ...

Dudley Hanks wrote:
Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I
think I was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements
11.
If you feel like commenting, that'd be great. (I'll try to curb my
tendency to ask excessive questions.)

Take Care,
Dudley

You've got my disease. It needs to be rotated clockwise, the smokestacks,
tall buildings etc all lean left. My subjective impression is that the
image is rather bland. Whether this is due to your processing I cannot say,
the buildings interspersed with the trees is more interesting to me than the
grass and weeds in the foreground.

David

Thanks for the feedback, especially for telling me the pic's crooked.
Straightening pics is one of the next tasks to master on the todo list.

Also, I'm glad you told me it's bland. I thought it would be, so I pumped
up the mid-tones and saturation, but I guess it didn't help much. Better
composition / content is also on the todo list...

Take Care,
Dudley

Landscape
 

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2013062320224237709-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2013-06-23 19:21:44 -0700, "Dudley Hanks"
said:
Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I
think I was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.
What do you mean by "quasiHDR"?

Just that it's an attempt to compress a dynamic range my cam couldn't
capture by using multiple exposures and merging them using the exposure
merge feature in Elements.

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements 11.
That is a start, but just combining the bracket set with PSE11 does not
make it any sort of HDR.

Your result is bland and no better than the WB problem shot, HDR
doesn't really seem to be needed.
If you are going to process the 5 shot bracket as an HDR you will need
at a minimum the Photoshop "merge to HDR" feature or dedicated HDR
software such as Photomatix or NIK HDR Efex Pro2.

It's my understanding that HDR is simply a term used to describe the process
used to compress a highly dynamic scene into colours / tones that can be
reproduced in a single image. Am I missing something in this definition?

If you care to post the 5 shots from your HDR bracket and I would be
happy to see what I can get from them.

This pic is just the end result of an exercise I undertook to help me
understand an issue I'm systematically working through: to develop a
process by which I can achieve results similar to those of a sighted
photographer in settings whereby the lighting range exceeds the capability
of my camera to capture it, and in which it is impractical to use an
artificial means to smooth out the lighting curve (i.e. flash, reflectors,
etc).

I understand that a few adjustments in Camera Raw to the shadows,
highlights, whites, and blacks sliders, to name only a few, can do the same
thing, but it wouldn't tell me much about what kind of results can be
achieved with the exposure merge feature.

It's not an attempt to produce a completed image for the sake of the image,
just another step in the journey...

After I feel more comfortable doing an exposure merge, I'll devote more time
and energy to producing an actual HDR image.


Take Care,
Dudley

Landscape
 

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, June 23, 2013 10:21:44 PM UTC-4, Dudley Hanks wrote:
Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I think
I

was able to put together the image I was shooting for.



http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg



It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.



Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements 11.



If you feel like commenting, that'd be great. (I'll try to curb my
tendency

to ask excessive questions.)



Take Care,

Dudley
What I would fix:
1. The chromatic aberration at the edge of the field.
2. The crooked horizon.
3. The neon-green grass.
4. I'd probably go the opposite way on the contrast. Rather than HDR, I'd
push the
contrast to add some starkness to the image.


Thanks, Rich, really glad you replied.

I'll have to leave the chromatic aberration for the time being, as it's
beyond my current abilities... but, that's something that's always lurking
in the back of my mind.

the neon grass, it sounds like I pushed the mid-tones a bit too far, so
I'll try backing that off a bit and try for a more neutral colour.

Your last point actually tells me the most, in that I had pushed the
contrast of each of the original images about 20 points on the contrast
slider in Camera RAW. It's interesting that the merge seems to have killed
that bump...

The stark look is what I was shooting for, hence the weeds in the
foreground, etc...

I had also added a bit of sharpening with the aim of getting a contrasty,
grainy look.

Once again, thanks for the reply. I'm going to have to ponder this for a
while.

Take Care,
Dudley

Landscape
 

On 2013-06-23 21:09:42 -0700, "Dudley Hanks" said:

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2013062320224237709-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2013-06-23 19:21:44 -0700, "Dudley Hanks" said:
Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I
think I was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.
What do you mean by "quasiHDR"?

Just that it's an attempt to compress a dynamic range my cam couldn't
capture by using multiple exposures and merging them using the exposure
merge feature in Elements.

There is more to HDR than merging an exposure bracket set. Stacking
those exposures will give you a blend. However, the dynamic range is
not going to be expanded as evidenced in your result image.

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements 11.
That is a start, but just combining the bracket set with PSE11 does not
make it any sort of HDR.

Your result is bland and no better than the WB problem shot, HDR
doesn't really seem to be needed.
If you are going to process the 5 shot bracket as an HDR you will need
at a minimum the Photoshop "merge to HDR" feature or dedicated HDR
software such as Photomatix or NIK HDR Efex Pro2.

It's my understanding that HDR is simply a term used to describe the
process used to compress a highly dynamic scene into colours / tones
that can be reproduced in a single image. Am I missing something in
this definition?

An HDR image is the result of processing an HDR exposure bracket stack
to capture a wider dynamic range than you would obtain in a "normal"
exposure. Together with the merge, there are also tone-mapping, tonal
contrast, saturation, and other tweeks to make it truly work right.

If you care to post the 5 shots from your HDR bracket and I would be
happy to see what I can get from them.

This pic is just the end result of an exercise I undertook to help me
understand an issue I'm systematically working through: to develop a
process by which I can achieve results similar to those of a sighted
photographer in settings whereby the lighting range exceeds the
capability of my camera to capture it, and in which it is impractical
to use an artificial means to smooth out the lighting curve (i.e.
flash, reflectors, etc).

....and certainly true HDR processing can give you that type of
solution. I suggest you get a trial of Photomatix or NIK HDR Efex Pro
2, so you can see what you can really do with those bracketed shots.
More importantly HDR software can do a decent job of doing single
exposure tone-mapping, which might be all you need.

I understand that a few adjustments in Camera Raw to the shadows,
highlights, whites, and blacks sliders, to name only a few, can do the
same thing,

Not quite.

but it wouldn't tell me much about what kind of results can be achieved
with the exposure merge feature.

Exposure merge on its own is not the answer.

Again, exposure merge is not HDR.

It's not an attempt to produce a completed image for the sake of the
image, just another step in the journey...

After I feel more comfortable doing an exposure merge, I'll devote more
time and energy to producing an actual HDR image.


Take Care,
Dudley



--
Regards,

Savageduck

Landscape
 

In article ,
"Dudley Hanks" wrote:

Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I think I
was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements 11.

If you feel like commenting, that'd be great. (I'll try to curb my tendency
to ask excessive questions.)

Take Care,
Dudley

As others have said, it's a bit bland. Since you were after some HDR
effect, I made this:

http://sandman.net/files/dudley_hanks.jpg

Horizon straightened. Chromatic aberration fixed, sharpened, and HDR
detail enhanced. :)


--
Sandman[.net]

Landscape
 

On 2013-06-23 22:10:56 -0700, Savageduck said:

On 2013-06-23 21:09:42 -0700, "Dudley Hanks" said:

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2013062320224237709-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2013-06-23 19:21:44 -0700, "Dudley Hanks" said:
Ok, now that I've got that communications glitch straightened out, I
think I was able to put together the image I was shooting for.

http://www.blind-apertures.ca/pics/Landscape.jpg

It's a quasiHDR image of the river valley, here in Edmonton.
What do you mean by "quasiHDR"?

Just that it's an attempt to compress a dynamic range my cam couldn't
capture by using multiple exposures and merging them using the exposure
merge feature in Elements.

There is more to HDR than merging an exposure bracket set. Stacking
those exposures will give you a blend. However, the dynamic range is
not going to be expanded as evidenced in your result image.

Five shots, ranging from -2 to +2 stops and combined using Elements 11.
That is a start, but just combining the bracket set with PSE11 does not
make it any sort of HDR.

Your result is bland and no better than the WB problem shot, HDR
doesn't really seem to be needed.
If you are going to process the 5 shot bracket as an HDR you will need
at a minimum the Photoshop "merge to HDR" feature or dedicated HDR
software such as Photomatix or NIK HDR Efex Pro2.

It's my understanding that HDR is simply a term used to describe the
process used to compress a highly dynamic scene into colours / tones
that can be reproduced in a single image. Am I missing something in
this definition?

An HDR image is the result of processing an HDR exposure bracket stack
to capture a wider dynamic range than you would obtain in a "normal"
exposure. Together with the merge, there are also tone-mapping, tonal
contrast, saturation, and other tweeks to make it truly work right.

If you care to post the 5 shots from your HDR bracket and I would be
happy to see what I can get from them.

This pic is just the end result of an exercise I undertook to help me
understand an issue I'm systematically working through: to develop a
process by which I can achieve results similar to those of a sighted
photographer in settings whereby the lighting range exceeds the
capability of my camera to capture it, and in which it is impractical
to use an artificial means to smooth out the lighting curve (i.e.
flash, reflectors, etc).

...and certainly true HDR processing can give you that type of
solution. I suggest you get a trial of Photomatix or NIK HDR Efex Pro
2, so you can see what you can really do with those bracketed shots.
More importantly HDR software can do a decent job of doing single
exposure tone-mapping, which might be all you need.

I understand that a few adjustments in Camera Raw to the shadows,
highlights, whites, and blacks sliders, to name only a few, can do the
same thing,

Not quite.

but it wouldn't tell me much about what kind of results can be achieved
with the exposure merge feature.

Exposure merge on its own is not the answer.

Again, exposure merge is not HDR.

It's not an attempt to produce a completed image for the sake of the
image, just another step in the journey...

After I feel more comfortable doing an exposure merge, I'll devote more
time and energy to producing an actual HDR image.


Take Care,
Dudley

Just to give you an idea of a single exposure tone map treatment here
is your original compare with the result after a run through NIK HDR
Efex Pro 2 for tone mapping, no exposure brackets used.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_241.jpg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

Landscape
 

On 24/06/2013 06:31, Sandman wrote:
[]
As others have said, it's a bit bland. Since you were after some HDR
effect, I made this:

http://sandman.net/files/dudley_hanks.jpg

Horizon straightened. Chromatic aberration fixed, sharpened, and HDR
detail enhanced. :)

... for me, that's an example of everything which makes me /hate/ HDR.
Absolutely awful. Something between that and your original bland and
over-exposed image, if possible.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu