HDR of moving subject

So as I understand it, and HDR is an image made of several images of the same thing at different exposures stitched together. I've seen HDRs of things that are moving, like bicycles, but doesn't everything in the frame have to be stationary, otherwise you would end up with a blurred image since the bike is moving and in different places in each of the frames?

I suspect what you are seeing isnt true HDR but rather the combining of .jpg images from a single raw file pushed and pulled and then combined in a program like photomatix.

I think a lot of them are tone-mapped as well...

Yes so you can do a single image "HDR" so to speak in any of the big apps like Photomatix or NIK Pro HDR, its not a "true" HDR, but is tonemapped and looks as one.

You can as mentioned above also take a single raw file, and adjust the exposure and save multiple different image files of different exposures after the fact and use them to create your HDR.

Shoot color negative film.

See this thread about the Magic Lantern DualISO image acquisition feature as well:

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1333150

I just added a couple of moving subject examples.

kirk

As mentioned above, programs such as Nik HDR Efex Pro can work with a single RAW file to produce a sort of HDR effect. In my experience sometimes it works well, other times not -- depends on the details of the individual image. You can also do processing in a program such as Nik Color Efex Pro that, using the right filters, can give a HDR look to an image.

Here is an example of one I made from a single image using NIK HDR Efex Pro

WOW! I guess that I need to update my NIK tools!

Tony-S wrote in post #16353175
Shoot color negative film.

Thank you!

Seriously, Porta gives me the same dynamic range as 5-7 shots from my digital Canons.
Portra 160 + My EOS Rebel x and I'm a happy camper.

Simple. In Lr/ACR you can pull the highlights down and push the shadows. Get the benefit of all the dynamic range captured in the raw file without the tonemapped look. You can selectively adjust using the brushes for an even better effect and no need to run the image through another software app.

So it's not even an HDR at all...makes more sense.
Thanks for the help!

Scatterbrained wrote in post #16353675
Simple. In Lr/ACR you can pull the highlights down and push the shadows. Get the benefit of all the dynamic range captured in the raw file without the tonemapped look. You can selectively adjust using the brushes for an even better effect and no need to run the image through another software app.

Good point! Check out these free presets for Lightroom, for example:

http://lightroomkiller​tips.com/?p=3972

Scatterbrained wrote in post #16353675
Simple. In Lr/ACR you can pull the highlights down and push the shadows. Get the benefit of all the dynamic range captured in the raw file without the tonemapped look.

The problem is, few digital sensors can record more than 10 or 11 stops of DR, which is readily surpassed in many landscape scenes. If the information isn't there, you can never recover it.

Tony-S wrote in post #16354071
The problem is, few digital sensors can record more than 10 or 11 stops of DR, which is readily surpassed in many landscape scenes. If the information isn't there, you can never recover it.

Did you read the OP or the rest of the thread? The discussion is about tonemapping single images and calling them HDR, which they aren't. My point it that someone who actually knows what they are doing can get similar results in Lr without having to take that one image and run it through HDR software.