HDR test

On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Alfred Molon:
...

Thanks for the feedback, but actually there isn't much in terms of
shadows. Here is how the 0EV processed RAW looks like:
http://www.molon.de/images/P61710041.jpg

I'll try process again these HDRs, to add more contrast.

And lose the blue cast. Lightroom. This is a job for Lightroom because
it's proven to fix such photos quickly and without making them look
unrealistic.

Currently *Photo Merge to HDR* in Lightroom delivers the most realistic HDR
results of any of the HDR processing tools, with none of the stereotypical,
overcooked HDR characteristics.

Photomatix which Alfred has used here, leans towards oversaturation, low
contrast, and glowing edge haloes. It is tough to make subtle adjutments to
get a truly realistic result from Photomatix tone mapping.
For what it's worth, here's a test series I did w/Photomatix.
Three RAWs (+/- 1EV, 0) [ My camera only does 3 shot brackets :-( ]


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s1pgfjmadrbvm4t/AACair1afwCuMYidbmdWPB_La?dl=0

I believe I managed to avoid over saturation and glowing edge halos. The
contrast
may be a bit low.

OK! I must be missing something. I see 5 JPGs none of which are IDed as an
HDR. They don’t appear to part of an exposure bracket, though movement
changes can be seen in the wave. The only obvious tonal changes I see are in
the pier structure on the right.

This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to HDR
in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 7/30/2017 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Alfred Molon:
...

Thanks for the feedback, but actually there isn't much in terms of
shadows. Here is how the 0EV processed RAW looks like:
http://www.molon.de/images/P61710041.jpg

I'll try process again these HDRs, to add more contrast.

And lose the blue cast. Lightroom. This is a job for Lightroom because
it's proven to fix such photos quickly and without making them look
unrealistic.

Currently *Photo Merge to HDR* in Lightroom delivers the most realistic HDR
results of any of the HDR processing tools, with none of the stereotypical,
overcooked HDR characteristics.

Photomatix which Alfred has used here, leans towards oversaturation, low
contrast, and glowing edge haloes. It is tough to make subtle adjutments to
get a truly realistic result from Photomatix tone mapping.
For what it's worth, here's a test series I did w/Photomatix.
Three RAWs (+/- 1EV, 0) [ My camera only does 3 shot brackets :-( ]


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s1pgfjmadrbvm4t/AACair1afwCuMYidbmdWPB_La?dl=0

I believe I managed to avoid over saturation and glowing edge halos. The
contrast
may be a bit low.

OK! I must be missing something. I see 5 JPGs none of which are IDed as an
HDR. They don’t appear to part of an exposure bracket, though movement
changes can be seen in the wave. The only obvious tonal changes I see are in
the pier structure on the right.

This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to HDR
in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha

OK, here are the three shots and the settings I used in Photomatix.


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eoyznr0n2...Pj5Vr8vea?dl=0
~~
All the ...2403~5 photos were processed with Photomatix. The one with
the [EV0] label was the unprocessed single exposure.
Four of the photos in the first link were part of a "what if" experiment
where I
applied different highlight and shadow corrections to IMG_2404 and IMG_2405
using ACR before running Photomatix.
I used the same Photomatix setting for each of the tests.

Again, I was just playing around with a what if...
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--




---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

In article .com,
Savageduck says...
This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to HDR
in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha

There doesn't seem to be that much dynamic range in that image series.
Couldn't you have just processed one RAW (for instance the 3776 or 3777)
and pulled up the shadows a bit? Just wondering.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Alfred Molon:
...

Thanks for the feedback, but actually there isn't much in terms of
shadows. Here is how the 0EV processed RAW looks like:
http://www.molon.de/images/P61710041.jpg

I'll try process again these HDRs, to add more contrast.

And lose the blue cast. Lightroom. This is a job for Lightroom because
it's proven to fix such photos quickly and without making them look
unrealistic.

Currently *Photo Merge to HDR* in Lightroom delivers the most realistic
HDR
results of any of the HDR processing tools, with none of the
stereotypical,
overcooked HDR characteristics.

Photomatix which Alfred has used here, leans towards oversaturation, low
contrast, and glowing edge haloes. It is tough to make subtle adjutments
to
get a truly realistic result from Photomatix tone mapping.
For what it's worth, here's a test series I did w/Photomatix.
Three RAWs (+/- 1EV, 0) [ My camera only does 3 shot brackets :-( ]


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s1pgfjmadrbvm4t/AACair1afwCuMYidbmdWPB_La?dl=0

I believe I managed to avoid over saturation and glowing edge halos. The
contrast
may be a bit low.

OK! I must be missing something. I see 5 JPGs none of which are IDed as an
HDR. They don’t appear to part of an exposure bracket, though movement
changes can be seen in the wave. The only obvious tonal changes I see are in
the pier structure on the right.

This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to HDR
in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha
OK, here are the three shots and the settings I used in Photomatix.


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eoyznr0n2b3q87d/AABuTt5UGFTih4DsPj5Vr8vea?dl=0

In your UseNet#2 folder you have the 3 JPG bracket and an an XMP file labeled
Beach Test #1.xmp. There is no HDR result.

All the ...2403~5 photos were processed with Photomatix. The one with
the [EV0] label was the unprocessed single exposure.

OK!

Four of the photos in the first link were part of a "what if" experiment
where I applied different highlight and shadow corrections to IMG_2404 and IMG_2405
using ACR before running Photomatix.

Why? It has been some time since I last used Photomatix and as best I can
remember you could process RAW files. Processing the RAW CR2 files would give
you a better DR for making any tone map adjustments

I used the same Photomatix setting for each of the tests.

Again, I was just playing around with a what if...

It is always good to experiment.

I took a look at your bracket, and due to the severe human movement I
couldn’t solve the ghost issue with Lightroom. So I went to my next HDR
tool *Aurora 2017 HDR* which is Mac only. Aurora handles ghosting and
movement very well.
Here is the result.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bt3f2kbrxlsb4lc/AACDooc0ySxBdn9NQUMqbRnTa

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On Jul 30, 2017, Alfred Molon wrote
(in . com):

In iganews.com,
Savageduck says...
This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to HDR
in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha

There doesn't seem to be that much dynamic range in that image series.
Couldn't you have just processed one RAW (for instance the 3776 or 3777)
and pulled up the shadows a bit? Just wondering.

That is a possibility, but shooting as an HDR let me lift detail in the
shadows without without introducing too much noise, which can always be a
problem when lifting the shadows too much. I could have pushed all sorts of
things with that tone map process to end up with something quite nauseating,
but I was trying for a realistic look.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 7/30/2017 6:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Alfred Molon:
...

Thanks for the feedback, but actually there isn't much in terms of
shadows. Here is how the 0EV processed RAW looks like:
http://www.molon.de/images/P61710041.jpg

I'll try process again these HDRs, to add more contrast.

And lose the blue cast. Lightroom. This is a job for Lightroom because
it's proven to fix such photos quickly and without making them look
unrealistic.

Currently *Photo Merge to HDR* in Lightroom delivers the most realistic
HDR
results of any of the HDR processing tools, with none of the
stereotypical,
overcooked HDR characteristics.

Photomatix which Alfred has used here, leans towards oversaturation, low
contrast, and glowing edge haloes. It is tough to make subtle adjutments
to
get a truly realistic result from Photomatix tone mapping.
For what it's worth, here's a test series I did w/Photomatix.
Three RAWs (+/- 1EV, 0) [ My camera only does 3 shot brackets :-( ]


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s1pgfjmadrbvm4t/AACair1afwCuMYidbmdWPB_La?dl=0

I believe I managed to avoid over saturation and glowing edge halos. The
contrast
may be a bit low.

OK! I must be missing something. I see 5 JPGs none of which are IDed as an
HDR. They don’t appear to part of an exposure bracket, though movement
changes can be seen in the wave. The only obvious tonal changes I see are in
the pier structure on the right.

This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to HDR
in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha
OK, here are the three shots and the settings I used in Photomatix.


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eoyznr0n2b3q87d/AABuTt5UGFTih4DsPj5Vr8vea?dl=0

In your UseNet#2 folder you have the 3 JPG bracket and an an XMP file labeled
Beach Test #1.xmp. There is no HDR result.

All the ...2403~5 photos were processed with Photomatix. The one with
the [EV0] label was the unprocessed single exposure.

OK!

Four of the photos in the first link were part of a "what if" experiment
where I applied different highlight and shadow corrections to IMG_2404 and IMG_2405
using ACR before running Photomatix.

Why? It has been some time since I last used Photomatix and as best I can
remember you could process RAW files. Processing the RAW CR2 files would give
you a better DR for making any tone map adjustments

I used the same Photomatix setting for each of the tests.

Again, I was just playing around with a what if...

It is always good to experiment.

I took a look at your bracket, and due to the severe human movement I
couldn’t solve the ghost issue with Lightroom. So I went to my next HDR
tool *Aurora 2017 HDR* which is Mac only. Aurora handles ghosting and
movement very well.
Here is the result.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bt3f2kbrxlsb4lc/AACDooc0ySxBdn9NQUMqbRnTa

I posted the "UseNet#2" link to show the untouched brackets from the
previous link.

I added my cropped HDR of the _2403.._2405 sequence [Yes, I made the sky
blue]
along with another different HDR from the same day.

I tend to like the somewhat over cooked post card look. Maybe I'll out
grow that
tendency someday. :-)
[YMMV]
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 6:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Alfred Molon:
...

Thanks for the feedback, but actually there isn't much in terms of
shadows. Here is how the 0EV processed RAW looks like:
http://www.molon.de/images/P61710041.jpg

I'll try process again these HDRs, to add more contrast.

And lose the blue cast. Lightroom. This is a job for Lightroom because
it's proven to fix such photos quickly and without making them look
unrealistic.

Currently *Photo Merge to HDR* in Lightroom delivers the most realistic
HDR results of any of the HDR processing tools, with none of the
stereotypical, overcooked HDR characteristics.

Photomatix which Alfred has used here, leans towards oversaturation, low
contrast, and glowing edge haloes. It is tough to make subtle adjutments
to get a truly realistic result from Photomatix tone mapping.
For what it's worth, here's a test series I did w/Photomatix.
Three RAWs (+/- 1EV, 0) [ My camera only does 3 shot brackets :-( ]


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s1pgfjmad...bmdWPB_La?dl=0

I believe I managed to avoid over saturation and glowing edge halos. The
contrast may be a bit low.

OK! I must be missing something. I see 5 JPGs none of which are IDed as an
HDR. They don’t appear to part of an exposure bracket, though movement
changes can be seen in the wave. The only obvious tonal changes I see are
in the pier structure on the right.

This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to
HDR in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha
OK, here are the three shots and the settings I used in Photomatix.


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eoyznr0n2b3q87d/AABuTt5UGFTih4DsPj5Vr8vea?dl=0

In your UseNet#2 folder you have the 3 JPG bracket and an an XMP file
labeled
Beach Test #1.xmp. There is no HDR result.

All the ...2403~5 photos were processed with Photomatix. The one with
the [EV0] label was the unprocessed single exposure.

OK!

Four of the photos in the first link were part of a "what if" experiment
where I applied different highlight and shadow corrections to IMG_2404 and
IMG_2405 using ACR before running Photomatix.

Why? It has been some time since I last used Photomatix and as best I can
remember you could process RAW files. Processing the RAW CR2 files would
give you a better DR for making any tone map adjustments

I used the same Photomatix setting for each of the tests.

Again, I was just playing around with a what if...

It is always good to experiment.

I took a look at your bracket, and due to the severe human movement I
couldn’t solve the ghost issue with Lightroom. So I went to my next HDR
tool *Aurora 2017 HDR* which is Mac only. Aurora handles ghosting and
movement very well.
Here is the result.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bt3f2kbrxlsb4lc/AACDooc0ySxBdn9NQUMqbRnTa
I posted the "UseNet#2" link to show the untouched brackets from the
previous link.

I added my cropped HDR of the _2403.._2405 sequence [Yes, I made the sky
blue] along with another different HDR from the same day.

I tend to like the somewhat over cooked post card look. Maybe I'll out
grow that tendency someday. :-)
[YMMV]

Then you should enjoy this rendition. ;-)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pwuvs82a7s9b6wc/IMG_2403_HDRTM1.jpeg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 7/30/2017 10:22 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 6:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Alfred Molon:
...

Thanks for the feedback, but actually there isn't much in terms of
shadows. Here is how the 0EV processed RAW looks like:
http://www.molon.de/images/P61710041.jpg

I'll try process again these HDRs, to add more contrast.

And lose the blue cast. Lightroom. This is a job for Lightroom because
it's proven to fix such photos quickly and without making them look
unrealistic.

Currently *Photo Merge to HDR* in Lightroom delivers the most realistic
HDR results of any of the HDR processing tools, with none of the
stereotypical, overcooked HDR characteristics.

Photomatix which Alfred has used here, leans towards oversaturation, low
contrast, and glowing edge haloes. It is tough to make subtle adjutments
to get a truly realistic result from Photomatix tone mapping.
For what it's worth, here's a test series I did w/Photomatix.
Three RAWs (+/- 1EV, 0) [ My camera only does 3 shot brackets :-( ]


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s1pgfjmad...bmdWPB_La?dl=0

I believe I managed to avoid over saturation and glowing edge halos. The
contrast may be a bit low.

OK! I must be missing something. I see 5 JPGs none of which are IDed as an
HDR. They don’t appear to part of an exposure bracket, though movement
changes can be seen in the wave. The only obvious tonal changes I see are
in the pier structure on the right.

This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to
HDR in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha
OK, here are the three shots and the settings I used in Photomatix.


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eoyznr0n2b3q87d/AABuTt5UGFTih4DsPj5Vr8vea?dl=0

In your UseNet#2 folder you have the 3 JPG bracket and an an XMP file
labeled
Beach Test #1.xmp. There is no HDR result.

All the ...2403~5 photos were processed with Photomatix. The one with
the [EV0] label was the unprocessed single exposure.

OK!

Four of the photos in the first link were part of a "what if" experiment
where I applied different highlight and shadow corrections to IMG_2404 and
IMG_2405 using ACR before running Photomatix.

Why? It has been some time since I last used Photomatix and as best I can
remember you could process RAW files. Processing the RAW CR2 files would
give you a better DR for making any tone map adjustments

I used the same Photomatix setting for each of the tests.

Again, I was just playing around with a what if...

It is always good to experiment.

I took a look at your bracket, and due to the severe human movement I
couldn’t solve the ghost issue with Lightroom. So I went to my next HDR
tool *Aurora 2017 HDR* which is Mac only. Aurora handles ghosting and
movement very well.
Here is the result.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bt3f2kbrxlsb4lc/AACDooc0ySxBdn9NQUMqbRnTa
I posted the "UseNet#2" link to show the untouched brackets from the
previous link.

I added my cropped HDR of the _2403.._2405 sequence [Yes, I made the sky
blue] along with another different HDR from the same day.

I tend to like the somewhat over cooked post card look. Maybe I'll out
grow that tendency someday. :-)
[YMMV]

Then you should enjoy this rendition. ;-)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pwuvs82a7s9b6wc/IMG_2403_HDRTM1.jpeg

Interesting but I'd like a bit more of a Norman Rockwell feel. :-)
I'm sure you could do a lot more from the untouched raw files.
Anyway, I'm enjoying the dialog and added perspective.
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

On 7/30/2017 3:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Ron C wrote
(in ):

On 7/30/2017 12:00 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 30, 2017, Davoud wrote
(in article ):

Alfred Molon:
...

Thanks for the feedback, but actually there isn't much in terms of
shadows. Here is how the 0EV processed RAW looks like:
http://www.molon.de/images/P61710041.jpg

I'll try process again these HDRs, to add more contrast.

And lose the blue cast. Lightroom. This is a job for Lightroom because
it's proven to fix such photos quickly and without making them look
unrealistic.

Currently *Photo Merge to HDR* in Lightroom delivers the most realistic HDR
results of any of the HDR processing tools, with none of the stereotypical,
overcooked HDR characteristics.

Photomatix which Alfred has used here, leans towards oversaturation, low
contrast, and glowing edge haloes. It is tough to make subtle adjutments to
get a truly realistic result from Photomatix tone mapping.
For what it's worth, here's a test series I did w/Photomatix.
Three RAWs (+/- 1EV, 0) [ My camera only does 3 shot brackets :-( ]


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/s1pgfjmadrbvm4t/AACair1afwCuMYidbmdWPB_La?dl=0

I believe I managed to avoid over saturation and glowing edge halos. The
contrast
may be a bit low.

OK! I must be missing something. I see 5 JPGs none of which are IDed as an
HDR. They don’t appear to part of an exposure bracket, though movement
changes can be seen in the wave. The only obvious tonal changes I see are in
the pier structure on the right.

This is an example of a 5 shot -2,-1,0,+1,+2 exposure bracket, merged to HDR
in Lightroom, and then adjusted. All exposures and the HDR included.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5ciz344uedin2f/AADo4pf-hfjs9s3n8Doj-Jzha

Added side note: My intent was to show that Photomatix could produce results
that were not over the top. I just happened to have that experiment at hand.
Four of the five were tone mapped in Photomatix and one was the EV0 shot.
The Photomatix pre-sets do tend to give over the top effects. Lots of
controls
to play with ...steep, perhaps non-intuitive, learning curve.
--
==
Later...
Ron C
--


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Savageduck:
Then you should enjoy this rendition. ;-)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pwuvs82a7s9b6wc/IMG_2403_HDRTM1.jpeg

Yuk.

Ron C:
Interesting but I'd like a bit more of a Norman Rockwell feel. :-)

You have to start with the composition. The picture must depict a
really sappy scene.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm