Is it worth it.??

[Minty]

Considering Photomatix is approx twice the cost of Dynamic Photo HDR, is it worth extra money.??

Trying to decide which to purchase (have tried trials of both, but I think the free version of Photomatix is lacking quite a few controls over the full version)

Is Photmatix twice as good.?

Thanks for your thoughts :)

[Scottes]

but I think the free version of Photomatix is lacking quite a few controls over the full version
Not according to Photomatix's site:
"The trial is fully functional and never expires, but applies a watermark to images produced with one of the two Tone Mapping methods and four of the six exposure blending modes."

[wolfden]

definitely worth it imho, just for the 16 bit mode alone where Dynamic Photo HDR is 8bit, but yea the trial mode on photomatix only watermarks the image.

Photomatix is my favorite one that I have tried.

[Minty]

Thanks for your thoughts. Reading a little more, Photomatix does certainly seem the tool of choice at the mo..

[Gary McDuffie]

Thanks for your thoughts. Reading a little more, Photomatix does certainly seem the tool of choice at the mo..

While that is true, I sure can't make it talk as well as I do Dynamic-Photo HDR. I just can't seem to make Photomatix work for me. Not sure why, because the examples posted by others are just outstanding! I think it may have to do with just not knowing HOW, or what to adjust when. :o Between that, and the price, so far I'm playing with DPHDR.

[Minty]

While that is true, I sure can't make it talk as well as I do Dynamic-Photo HDR. I just can't seem to make Photomatix work for me. Not sure why, because the examples posted by others are just outstanding! I think it may have to do with just not knowing HOW, or what to adjust when. :o Between that, and the price, so far I'm playing with DPHDR.
I know what you mean, DPHDR seems a little more user friendly for the noob like me. Think I will go for photomatix and learn how to use it properly..

[canonloader]

I have been using PM for over two years now and finally got an image I liked out of it maybe 5 months ago. It was a matter of sitting down with three or four windows open to several different tutorials and just working through them. While taking the spread of shots is important, taking the time to watch and remember what each slider does and what it changes, is more important. PM named some of the slider things for something besides the corresponding sliders or adjustments in Photoshop. If they had used the same names, it would have come a lot faster. ;)

I have tried at least 4 other trial programs, and none were as good as PM, IMO.

[wolfden]

check youtube for photomatix - lots of vids on there like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_guoBOQG9Uw

use the search box on youtube to find more

[Bsmooth]

It depends I guess on how much work you want to put into the image after you finish it in Phtomatix. I just finally purchased Photomatix after 3 months of fooling around with it. It still doesn't always seem to do what I think it should sometimes.
Just a few things though:first the RAW converter in Photomatix is ok,but I get much better results If you convert them to Tiff's first before bringing them into Photomatix.Daytime skies will always look lousy after going through Photomatix,unless you use smoothing to the point it pretty much takes away the HDR "look" altogether.
All the Photomatix images pretty much need tweaking in Photoshop afterwards.One in a great while there are some that don't need it but would still look better with a few slight adjustments.
Photomatix is just the "best" right now.I'm sure that will change,as long as better HDR from cameras themselves.Its about time IMHO anyway as this has been pretty much ignored in favor of the great Mege-pixel race.
Besides for me its making me learn a whole lot more about what Photoshop can do.

[TheMissouriShooter]

search for a discount code before purhcasing it. It saved me 15%