This is the HDR I mentioned yesterday, and as you can see it's a lot more HDR-like than yesterday's. It's constructed from seven auto-bracketed originals, shot at 1 EV intervals, and if you're interested one of the (not especially originals) is here:
As you can see, I perspective-corrected it and removed the flag pole from above the hut. Other than that the post-processing was relatively straightforward; involving a black and white conversion, a number of masked Curves for contrast and a final one for toning.
I did think about altering the sky by dropping in one of the originals, as I'm not convinced that tone mapping does a particularly convincing job with skies, but I thought I might include this image in next month's tutorial so decided to leave it in. If nothing else it's certainly typical of a standard HDR shot.
comment byXavier Rey at 08:18 PM (GMT) on 1 April, 2008
Wonderful work !!
comment byBen W at 10:34 PM (GMT) on 1 April, 2008
I like the tone of the image and the composition, but I think that the perspective correction is a bit too much.. The hut looks a bit distorted and the pole attached to the hut is not close to vertical and it keeps drawing my eye to..
I'm looking forward to trying out the HDR technique using your excellent tutorials!
comment bymikelangelo at 05:09 AM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
I'm impressed with how you not only converted the original somewhat nice photo into a very striking image, but even more so how you "envisioned" the final result when you took the picture. I would have likely glossed over this image for processing. Thanks for sharing both versions.
well done!
comment byowen-b at 10:53 AM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
Well I hve to say that although something about extreme HDRs fascinates me, ultimately I don't really like them as a photographic representation of anything. There's a milky quality to them once you push them past a certain level of subtlety that does'nt work for me, whereas yesterdays image is a much more pleasing use of the technique to achieve an image in that it's not immediately obviously HDR.
So, no criticism of you, just the technique!
Also, it seems to me that perhaps the perspective correction is a tiny bit too much on the verticals of the hut. I can see that the pole is wonky anyway, but the left hand edge as we look at it seems to lean the same way.
comment byNavin Harish at 12:10 PM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
The clouds look dramatic
comment byEl Jefe at 03:03 PM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
really a great work
comment bySi Goodchild at 03:16 PM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
Why 7 shots in 1 EV steps? Intuitively 3 shots at 3 EV steps would contain all the data you need for the extremes and enough tonal range to give sufficient overlap. Or am I missing something? (such as issues regarding tonal smoothness or quality)
Si
comment byChris at 03:56 PM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
I've been doing HDRs for a while and as I said before, think I got into some bad habits or my photoshop skills haven't evolved properly. I've decided to "start over again" by going back to your first tutorials to get back on the right path!
comment byReuben Chircop at 04:21 PM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
what a wonderful image mate, all looks to fall in place and the hut is just positioned in the right place. Good balancing.
comment bymooch at 04:51 PM (GMT) on 2 April, 2008
I do like the HDR effect but have found that the same (or similar) can be achieved by overlaying a single image processed 2 or more times. In essence an HDR but using one exposure. As long as you don't burn the highlights you can rescue light detail. I usually only process two images. One for the foreground (darker) and one for the sky. That said, this is still dramatic.
Si: sorry, I was half asleep last night and missed your question. In this instance, seven shots probably was overkill, but using a 1EV interval does provide a smoother final result.
This is the HDR I mentioned yesterday, and as you can see it's a lot more HDR-like than yesterday's. It's constructed from seven auto-bracketed originals, shot at 1 EV intervals, and if you're interested one of the (not especially originals) is here:
.../archives/closed_for_business.php
As you can see, I perspective-corrected it and removed the flag pole from above the hut. Other than that the post-processing was relatively straightforward; involving a black and white conversion, a number of masked Curves for contrast and a final one for toning.
I did think about altering the sky by dropping in one of the originals, as I'm not convinced that tone mapping does a particularly convincing job with skies, but I thought I might include this image in next month's tutorial so decided to leave it in. If nothing else it's certainly typical of a standard HDR shot.
All the shots were taken at f/8.0 and 24mm.
Wonderful work !!
I like the tone of the image and the composition, but I think that the perspective correction is a bit too much.. The hut looks a bit distorted and the pole attached to the hut is not close to vertical and it keeps drawing my eye to..
I'm looking forward to trying out the HDR technique using your excellent tutorials!
I'm impressed with how you not only converted the original somewhat nice photo into a very striking image, but even more so how you "envisioned" the final result when you took the picture. I would have likely glossed over this image for processing. Thanks for sharing both versions.
well done!
Well I hve to say that although something about extreme HDRs fascinates me, ultimately I don't really like them as a photographic representation of anything. There's a milky quality to them once you push them past a certain level of subtlety that does'nt work for me, whereas yesterdays image is a much more pleasing use of the technique to achieve an image in that it's not immediately obviously HDR.
So, no criticism of you, just the technique!
Also, it seems to me that perhaps the perspective correction is a tiny bit too much on the verticals of the hut. I can see that the pole is wonky anyway, but the left hand edge as we look at it seems to lean the same way.
The clouds look dramatic
really a great work
Why 7 shots in 1 EV steps? Intuitively 3 shots at 3 EV steps would contain all the data you need for the extremes and enough tonal range to give sufficient overlap. Or am I missing something? (such as issues regarding tonal smoothness or quality)
Si
I've been doing HDRs for a while and as I said before, think I got into some bad habits or my photoshop skills haven't evolved properly. I've decided to "start over again" by going back to your first tutorials to get back on the right path!
what a wonderful image mate, all looks to fall in place and the hut is just positioned in the right place. Good balancing.
I do like the HDR effect but have found that the same (or similar) can be achieved by overlaying a single image processed 2 or more times. In essence an HDR but using one exposure. As long as you don't burn the highlights you can rescue light detail. I usually only process two images. One for the foreground (darker) and one for the sky. That said, this is still dramatic.
Thanks all.
As for the perspective correction: I can see what you mean, but it didn't bother me too much ;-)
Si: sorry, I was half asleep last night and missed your question. In this instance, seven shots probably was overkill, but using a 1EV interval does provide a smoother final result.