My first attempt at HDR

This was three exposures, -2, 0,+2. This is my first try at this. I love what I see in the other HDR threads. I used Photomatix for the first time also. Pretty easy to work with. Sooooooo, whatcha think of my first try at this?

I'm not seeing depth of lighting here. It seems +/-2 would do better than this. How does this one compare to your mid or 0 exposure? Can you post for comparison?

Gary McDuffie wrote in post #9935605
I'm not seeing depth of lighting here. It seems +/-2 would do better than this. How does this one compare to your mid or 0 exposure? Can you post for comparison?

I'll post the 0 this afternoon. I'm at work right now and didn't bring it with me. But if I remember right, under the canopy and behind the horse was completely black. And alot of the white on the horse was nearly blown out

not very HDRish... very noisy up top too. have to make sure you watch the noise as youre going in photomatix or it can really screw your shot up (i learned the hard way)

Here's the 0

jcarp618 wrote in post #9936964
not very HDRish... very noisy up top too. have to make sure you watch the noise as youre going in photomatix or it can really screw your shot up (i learned the hard way)

What's a good way to reduce noise, shadow and highlight? Are the techniques different for shadow and highlight? I guess I need to watch the tutorial again.

The range looks like it was too big for plus/minus two.
But it is a good start. Compared to the mid shot your hdr has a lot more detail in the deeply shadowed area. If you use a shot where that detail matters more than in this shot you'll start to feel the energy of hdr. Thanks for sharing.

I would agree. As I understand it the way to avoid the noise is to make sure you have enough exposures to the bright side, bringing up the SNR in the dark areas. You'll need more than three shots to cover this range. My wider range shots have other problems, but I think I covered the range pretty well. I use anywhere from three to 7 exposures, depending on the range of the shot. Meter the bright areas, meter the dark areas, and then take as many exposures as it takes to fill in between them.

Thanks for the info guys. I also agree about the range. t's a very contrasty image. I would have done a much wider bracket with more images but I didn't have a tripod with me so I hand held these.

It certainly looks like a photograph.

R1200GS wrote in post #9942403
Thanks for the info guys. I also agree about the range. t's a very contrasty image. I would have done a much wider bracket with more images but I didn't have a tripod with me so I hand held these.

why not just take one photo and then do the - and + exposures in photoshop if you dont have a tripod. gets you pretty good results and no pesky worrying about the shots lining up without the tripod

jcarp618 wrote in post #9943442
why not just take one photo and then do the - and + exposures in photoshop if you dont have a tripod. gets you pretty good results and no pesky worrying about the shots lining up without the tripod

Cuz then I'd have to read all about how that is fake or faux HDR yadda yadda yadda.