Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos HDR Creation 
Thread started 30 Sep 2017 (Saturday) 05:56
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Aurora 2018 for Windows - alignment and deghosting tests

 
Stiga
Goldmember
Avatar
4,972 posts
Gallery: 804 photos
Likes: 1949
Joined Dec 2015
Location: Nr Perth, Scotland
     
Sep 30, 2017 05:56 |  #1

Virtually all my bracketed sets are hand held so any HDR app I use must have good image alignment as well as de-ghosting. Here is my test of these features after only 1 day of painless familiarisation! I have also included comparisons with other HDR processors that

I use. I do not have Lightroom and would be grateful if someone would merge my files to HDR with LR for me and post the result(s) in this thread. Here is the Mediafire link (external link) for you. Just click on the green download button to obtain 3 DNG files in a folder.

Aurora - Realistic Balanced preset, medium deghosting.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


easyHDR - Default preset, automatic deghosting


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


nik Efex HDR 2 - Balanced preset, auto deghosting set to 40

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!


Photomatix 6 - Tone Balancer method, auto deghosting set to 15

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!


My conclusion is that Aurora passed my alignment and deghosting test but too almost twice as long to achieve it than the other 3 processors. This may be becuase it is only a 32bit app -?

Martin
I'm not a gear guy but I have a tons of software :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Picture ­ North ­ Carolina
Gaaaaa! DOH!! Oops!
9,104 posts
Likes: 139
Joined Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
Post edited over 1 year ago by Picture North Carolina.
     
Sep 30, 2017 08:04 |  #2

Very nice test. Thanks for taking the time to create and post.

I think a common mistake people would make is to place all attention on the main subject - the orange leaves.

However, the background leaves alignment also tell a story.

Using the lower right quadrant, the background green leaves only: Photomatix 6 is horrible. Lots of double if not triple imaging. The clear looser.

Aurora and Easy HDR are both a little soft - beyond the DOF blur. Nik seem to be the winner here. But then the upper left background green of the Nik is poorly deghosted.

Hard to tell without being able to view at 100%, but the overall winner here seems to be Aurora. A tiny but oversaturated on the oranges (as was photomatix), but that is much more easily repaired than poor deghosting.

Thanks, Martin.


Website (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stiga
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,972 posts
Gallery: 804 photos
Likes: 1949
Joined Dec 2015
Location: Nr Perth, Scotland
Post edited over 1 year ago by Stiga.
     
Sep 30, 2017 08:34 |  #3

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #18463320 (external link)
Very nice test. Thanks for taking the time to create and post.

I think a common mistake people would make is to place all attention on the main subject - the orange leaves.

However, the background leaves alignment also tell a story.

Using the lower right quadrant, the background green leaves only: Photomatix 6 is horrible. Lots of double if not triple imaging. The clear looser.

Aurora and Easy HDR are both a little soft - beyond the DOF blur. Nik seem to be the winner here. But then the upper left background green of the Nik is poorly deghosted.

Hard to tell without being able to view at 100%, but the overall winner here seems to be Aurora. A tiny but oversaturated on the oranges (as was photomatix), but that is much more easily repaired than poor deghosting.

Thanks, Martin.

Thanks for your positive feedback.

I should have added that I made no attempt to alter colors, saturation or contrast. Apart from further denoising and resisizing, they are as straight out of the processor. The Photomatix version could have been improved by increasing the deghosting level from 15 to 20 or 25. All I concentrated on was the orange leaves as the background leaves are all well out of focus.


Martin
I'm not a gear guy but I have a tons of software :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bianchi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,613 posts
Gallery: 54 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5348
Joined Jan 2010
Location: USA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Bianchi. (2 edits in all)
     
Oct 21, 2017 10:07 |  #4

Thanks for taking the time to create this test Martin.. Why didn't you also include SNS-HDR, I thought you like that one very much.


My Gear flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stiga
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,972 posts
Gallery: 804 photos
Likes: 1949
Joined Dec 2015
Location: Nr Perth, Scotland
     
Oct 21, 2017 10:47 |  #5

Bianchi wrote in post #18477512 (external link)
Thanks for taking the time to create this test Martin.. Why didn't you also include SNS-HDR, I thought you like that one very much.

Because SNS-HDR cannoty deghost -? Sometimes I deghost a scene like this with Photomatix or easyHDR, save the 32bit radiance file and tonemap that with SNS-HDR but it is a bit long-winded.

You are right, I do like SNS-HDR; IMO it generates the best blue and green hues.

Thanks.


Martin
I'm not a gear guy but I have a tons of software :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DagoImaging
Goldmember
Avatar
1,847 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1087
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 01, 2017 11:33 |  #6

Here they are from LR.

First one is Medium Deghosting


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Second is High


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Sony a6300/ 16-70/4 / 70-200/4 G / Sony HVL-60M

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bianchi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,613 posts
Gallery: 54 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5348
Joined Jan 2010
Location: USA
     
Dec 01, 2017 12:04 |  #7

DagoImaging have they updated Aurora to now include the Luminosity mask, also if you use PS, can you now work from a duplicated copy rather than the back round layer. This is all related to Aurora for windows plugin from LR & PS.

Skylum/Macphun support told me with the first update they would include the Luminosity mask. Well 2 upgrades later, and there was no Luminosity mask. Also they would correct the issue of working with back round layer, as everyone wants to work non destructively.. That's how all other plugins work for LR & Ps , so you can work non destructively in PS.


My Gear flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stiga
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,972 posts
Gallery: 804 photos
Likes: 1949
Joined Dec 2015
Location: Nr Perth, Scotland
     
Dec 01, 2017 13:13 |  #8

DagoImaging wrote in post #18508208 (external link)
Here they are from LR.

First one is Medium Deghosting

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by DagoImaging in
./showthread.php?p=185​08208&i=i150902056
forum: HDR Creation


Second is High

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by DagoImaging in
./showthread.php?p=185​08208&i=i121836019
forum: HDR Creation

Many thanks for processing this set with LR. I don't see much difference between them - but my eyesight is not 100% As expected, they look natural. LR has done a good job.


Martin
I'm not a gear guy but I have a tons of software :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Picture ­ North ­ Carolina
Gaaaaa! DOH!! Oops!
9,104 posts
Likes: 139
Joined Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
     
Dec 01, 2017 18:09 |  #9

Stiga wrote in post #18508268 (external link)
I don't see much difference between them...

Me neither. I have checked foreground and background and am hard-pressed to see any difference at all


Website (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DagoImaging
Goldmember
Avatar
1,847 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1087
Joined Nov 2012
Post edited 11 months ago by DagoImaging.
     
Dec 01, 2017 19:05 |  #10

Bianchi wrote in post #18508229 (external link)
DagoImaging have they updated Aurora to now include the Luminosity mask, also if you use PS, can you now work from a duplicated copy rather than the back round layer. This is all related to Aurora for windows plugin from LR & PS.

Skylum/Macphun support told me with the first update they would include the Luminosity mask. Well 2 upgrades later, and there was no Luminosity mask. Also they would correct the issue of working with back round layer, as everyone wants to work non destructively.. That's how all other plugins work for LR & Ps , so you can work non destructively in PS.

I do not find the luminosity mask option on the Windows version.

Edit -
I stand corrected it is there but not obvious and VERY limited from what I can tell.

I watched a YT video and it said in 2017 you could pick the zone you wanted to create the LM for.
In 2018 version all I get is the option to create a luminosity mask and it appears to be a Midtone mask. I cannot control which LM I want, therefore making it completely worthless for me.


Sony a6300/ 16-70/4 / 70-200/4 G / Sony HVL-60M

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bianchi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,613 posts
Gallery: 54 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5348
Joined Jan 2010
Location: USA
     
Dec 01, 2017 20:29 |  #11

Thanks DI, I would agree worthleass. When did the luminosity mask get included. After the second update it still wasn't there. In the previous Mac version it was there, but you better know where to find it, and how to use it from the UT vids I seen.

Any word on the back round layer in PS vs using a duplicate layer ?


My Gear flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DagoImaging
Goldmember
Avatar
1,847 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1087
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 02, 2017 09:25 |  #12

The LM function was added to the windows version after the latest update a couple days ago.

I tried fixing an image in PS, couple layers, saving it as a tiff and then opening it in Aurora, it only saw the top layer. I had to merge all layers to be able to use it in Aurora.


Sony a6300/ 16-70/4 / 70-200/4 G / Sony HVL-60M

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,940 views & 2 likes for this thread
Aurora 2018 for Windows - alignment and deghosting tests
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos HDR Creation 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is HCH
813 guests, 434 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.