Corn

[Dark-Hawk]

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/6940/cornfinalce8.jpg
Posted this in the still life section already but figured I'd throw it in here for all you HDR fans to check out as well. 8 exposures.

[-Douglas-]

Awesome, but damn, 8 exposures?

[Dark-Hawk]

Awesome, but damn, 8 exposures?
I generally prefer using more than 3 exposures and for this one I went with 8 ;). When I use 3 exposures I notice a lot more of a halo effect around objects and generally am not as pleased with the colors.

[canonloader]

More is better. It came out nice for colors. Nice moody feel to it.

[Serrator]

Kinda corney...but cool! :) Dark-Hawk...would you mind posting a 3 bracket (-2,0,2) version for comparison to show the issue you are seeing?

@canonloader..I may differ on your assessment that "more is better", I would rather think just enough is best, but before I say anything more I want to make sure I understand your thinking on this?

[canonloader]

My thinking on it comes from my experience. When you have a true, high dynamic range scene, like a dark room with a sunlit window on one side, then 5, 7 or even 9 exposures are always better than 3. An outside scene under the trees on a cloudy day, sure, you can get by with three. But again, especially with the new version of PM, 5 or 7 exposures produce less noise for a smoother image.

[JuiceBox]

I've found that even with outdoor shots, three isn't enough. I usually see a lot of haloing around treetops where they meet the sky; not particularly appealing to my eyes.

[Dark-Hawk]

Serrator, I didn't even bother trying to process with with only 3 images, but as the other said the more images I use for an HDR, the less noise and haloing I tend to see in the final production. There wasn't a high range of light in this, but due to the low light in the scene, stacking the exposures via HDR helped bring out the colors again to ultimately show you what my eyes saw.

[Serrator]

@canonloader
Okay...then I think we agree. When I first read your statement it seemed to mean that taking more exposures even beyond what is needed to cover the DR is good, which to me is not really true. IMO the image above does not necessitate 8exp unless they were taken at less than 1 ev spacing for some reason and to be honest I do not see a whole lot of DR within the scene to even require multiple exposures in the first place. That's what prompted my question...thanks for the quick reply!

@JuiceBox,
What software do you use to generate your images? I have not seen the haloing issue when using 3 exposures....which is what most of mine are using AEB. Here are a couple of my 3 exp with tree and sky...do these have the halo effect you mentioned?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/serrator/2503396691/sizes/l/in/set-72157605132667057/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/serrator/2061495048/sizes/o/in/set-72157594403866898/

Also for reference here is Photomatix has to say:

(Note: For most daylight outdoor scenes excluding the sun, 3 exposures spaced by two EVs are often sufficient to properly cover the dynamic range).

Here is the link to the quoted above:
http://www.hdrsoft.com/resources/dri.html

[JuiceBox]

I also use photomatix, but I think it really depends on the shot. It's usually present on particularly sunny, bright days. I think it also depends on where the sun is in relation to your shot, et cetera.

[canonloader]

There is also a problem that digital sensors have, and it shows up best in the old 1D Classic and the 40D, and that's banding and noise in darker regions of an image, when you are compensating for the light regions. It was quite famous in the 1D and many people see it popping up again in the 40D. For this reason, more than 3 shots is always better in scenes with a higher percentage of dark shadow area than light. Merging more images that were exposed for the dark, does away with the banding and the light will take care of itself, cause it doesn't exhibit banding or noise.

[Serrator]

Interesting. I have never seen that problem, but I have shot most of my HDRs using a 350d. I just recently bought a 40d and really haven't seen this issue with it as well, but most of my HDRs tend to be in full sunlight with a majority of bright regions. I will have to check this out. Thanks for info.

So this is a sensor specific issue and not the tone mapping software? I have noticed definite differences with various HDR software. Currently I am using Essential HDR software, I find it handles noise and halos much better than my previous PM software.

[canonloader]

Here is a shot I took just the other day with the 1D, while the 40D was in the shop. You can see the banding in the shadow areas on the right side (http://www.picturelacrosse.com/birds/bluejays08/bluejay-db3b2445-111808.jpg). I took this with -2/3 exposure compensation dialed in by mistake. I meant to go to +2/3.

There is a thread in the EOS Camera section too, showing banding in the 40D (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=598929). I've seen it a few times with my 40D also.

It's a camera problem, either the sensor or the Digic processor. I now see some threads about banding in the new 50D too, so it may be something to do with the sensor. But if you use images that have banding, it's going to affect the HDR you make with it.

[Serrator]

Here is a shot I took just the other day with the 1D, while the 40D was in the shop. You can see the banding in the shadow areas on the right side (http://www.picturelacrosse.com/birds/bluejays08/bluejay-db3b2445-111808.jpg). I took this with -2/3 exposure compensation dialed in by mistake. I meant to go to +2/3.

There is a thread in the EOS Camera section too, showing banding in the 40D (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=598929). I've seen it a few times with my 40D also.

It's a camera problem, either the sensor or the Digic processor. I now see some threads about banding in the new 50D too, so it may be something to do with the sensor. But if you use images that have banding, it's going to affect the HDR you make with it.


Thanks canonloader for the sample and link. From what I read in the thread you linked the banding appears to be related to using the higher ISO's as well, which is probably why I may not have had this issue. Most of my HDR stuff is almost always at 100 ISO and using a tripod. What did you shoot the bird sample at? I definitely can see the banding you are referring too.

[theague]

I don't see an image.

[Serrator]

...while the 40D was in the shop. .

I forgot to mention that one of my photography buddies was with me at a local high school football game last weekend with his 40d and he got the err99 message. It would start up and run but anytime he would hit the shutter button it would lock up. We cleared the batteries, swapped lenses and such with no luck. He had purchased this one at Bestbuy last summer and took out their $100 warranty add on...bottom line they gave him the choice of a new 40d or for $100 more dollars he could upgrade to the 50d. He brought home the 50d.

[canonloader]

What did you shoot the bird sample at?
That was at ISO 400 @ 1/800sec. But banding on the 1D comes from dark areas and setting for under exposure, which I did in that one with -2/3 Ev. That's why it was such a problem. They supposedly fixed it with a firmware update and changed some things in later models. Mine is an early model though.

[Oneslowz28]

I don't see an image that was a good candidate for HDR processing. What I do see is an image that could have been made with a properly exposed single capture. With no HDR processing.

[Bill Boehme]

More is better. It came out nice for colors. Nice moody feel to it.

Moody corn? ;)

Sort of ... ahem ... corny, but I like the Indian corn colors.