hmmm...methinks jer was not espectin that card...



and darn straight. 2 unwanted images per week is 2 over my quota

I'M TRYING REAL HARD NOT TO #### THIS ###### UP, YO.

Bah, no fun.

lol

i think i'll choose to be glad i didnt see whatever THAT was...

when you do a single image HDR, how many images do you break it in to?

3, 5, 7, 9, as many as possible???

I usually do three (-1.5, 0, 1.5), sometimes five; more than that and the the dynamic range of the original image is usually so comparatively small that at the extremes it's often close to solidly black or white.

3 or 5 with EV compensation of +/- 2 between each step. More than that and even at iso80 or 100 the final image gets too noisy. Even then I sometimes run them through Noise Ninja before Photomatix.

Really, like -4, -2, 0, 2, 4? I usually do three (-1.5, 0, 1.5) or five (-2, -1, 0, 1, 2).

But then we're generally going for different looks, arent we?

yup...i've only done -4, -2, 0 , 2, 4 on a couple of single image HDRs, one being:



^^after that and the B&W version, Lightroom is my hero Trees needed -3.5 before you could even tell they were there.


Mostly it's just -2, 0, 2, ie:



and






but yeah, everyone's process is different depending on their style, and every photo needs different treatment anyway.

well, its a starting point for me

thanks for the input guys

Interesting. Thanks, Daniel.



And latazyo, we need to see your first few attempts. You know, for the lulz.

will do

honestly, lulz from more experienced photographers can only help to improve my work

this is a skill that has to develop and input form others is important to me

Well, take comfort: they can't be worse than dshnarw's at the start of this thread.







I KID I KID

sure weren't expecting that one to be the 8 stop range were ya??




yes, please post and they can always "magically disappear" later




ouch. i did rather bellyflop into photography i suppose

..... teehee......

lets see yours...

Btw, I think he misunderstood what I was suggesting.


Hellz no, I know better than to give you ammo.

i missed that. methinks he did too...


you're not any fun

I can't PP the images first, right? only exposure changes or they won't merge correctly, is that right?

I'll be using photomatix if that matters

little less enthused about that one it seems...



I've never tried pp first, other than what i can do in the raw software - contrast, sat, wb, etc. - but I expect it would mess with the final image from Photomatix.

Apparently Jer is just as shy as the ginger.

working on it still

I didn't realize I actually had to do stuff in photomatix, I thought it was all automatic

sure did run outta here quick didn't he??



lol, yup, you can go as crazy or as ummm...boring?? as you want.

Is there anything more relaxing than editing photos, drinking disaronno, and listening to Jack Johnson?

Anyways, a few tries from this afternoon (I blame you all for my future carpal tunnel):













Got some more........

likey


I'm going to a ghost town tomorrow, I should have some to post myself sometime this weekend.

nice lan lan!! very subtle.

Very nice Lalani. As mentioned, I like the subtlety.

Thanks guys.
Nobody is going to crack a joke about the giant fugging bull? lol

jack johnson wtf lalani

o, and monochrome it imo:








so does that mean jer owes you hdr man parts or does hdr bull parts not count??

Wha... my music preference changes upon mood and... activities.


Nah, doesn't count.

Dis?

ok, here we go....this is the first pic I came across in lightroom that seemed like it may be HDR-able, but I dont know if it was a good candidate or not

here is the original after I LR'd it, seems like quite a failure


the HDRs are all from a single image, broken into 5 different exposures, leaves are a little too green

HDR -2,-1,0,1,2


HDR -4,-2,0,2,4 with same settings as first HDR


HDR -4,-2,0,2,4 w/ different settings

Cool shot, lat.
It definitely brings out the green.

Great results, lat. Yeah, I definitely prefer the subtlety of half stops, but I see where you're going with those. Now, just find a more interesting subject.

The one thing that is distracting in the HDRs that works fine in the original is the snow on the branches. For some reason in the HDRs is looks like ghosting. Prolly just me though.

thats about right on the b&w lani


nice first results dude...much better than my fantastically horrible failure.

guess it's a little late to mention that I've always had issues with HDR and snow. something just never seems right in it.

actually, i kinda like the potential in the original...

I prefer more contrasty b&w shots, so I'm not happy with that one...

thanks guys

Im looking through some old pics now, I think I have a lot of pics that can be helped by this because of the sky and dark foregrounds

so bump up the contrast you havent reached a crisp white yet...





we're eagerly awaiting your next try

probably won't be until late tonight

I have seminar all weekend......

Meh, when I want to do b&w, I go all the way into film. (something else for you to try)

We should all thank andy for renewing the interest in HDR, mirite?







See the face?

damn ur a coona$$ swap rat

Ass isn't censored.

eh, i'll give it a try one day. but i really like the control and instant gratification of digital, especially with B&W since I can play with each color individually.

nailed the processing on the last 3, lani. very nice



he was tryin to be nice for the kiddies

I need a fisheye lens...

you could make a panorama and warp it like its a fisheye