Aurora 2018 coming in September

Availability: Aurora HDR 2018 will be availabe for pre-order on September 12, and released on September 28.

Pricing: Mixed-computer households can share the same product key for Mac and PC that can be activated on 5 devices.

Pre-order: Current users of Aurora HDR may upgrade at a special pre-order price of $49. New users can purchase Aurora HDR 2018 at a special pre-order price of $89. A collection of bonuses will also be included with every purchase.

Retail price: $59 for current Aurora HDR users, $99 for new users


http://www.43rumors.co​m …windows-mac-september-12/

Thanks for the heads up

Have you watched the announcement video?

https://aurorahdr.com/​2018

click on the "watch video" link.

Trey Ratcliff ... seriously, dude. It embarrassing.

kirk

Agreed Trey way out in left field. His presets have 60s acid trip names and most are way over the top. Thank goodness you can use them if you back off the opacity.

MCAsan wrote in post #18428572
Agreed Trey way out in left field. His presets have 60s acid trip names and most are way over the top. Thank goodness you can use them if you back off the opacity.

The software still cannot merge 3 shots of a tree against gradient blue sky without creating horrible color artifacts in the sky. If you want to make Trey-style images though, the software is tops.

kirk

kirkt wrote in post #18428596
The software still cannot merge 3 shots of a tree against gradient blue sky without creating horrible color artifacts in the sky. If you want to make Trey-style images though, the software is tops.

kirk

Re: "software still..."

Are you a beta tester? Are you speaking of the new 2018 not yet released?

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #18429082
Re: "software still..."

Are you a beta tester? Are you speaking of the new 2018 not yet released?

I am not a beta tester. I am referring to the current version. When the application was first released, I tested it and found that it could not do this simple task. I even emailed the devs and provided them with the test files. They responded and thanked me and that was that. Apparently they have not addressed whatever the issue is in their algorithm.

Each time I get an email with a announcement that they have come out with an update, I download the trial again and run the same files through the new version. So far, there is no improvement.

Here are the three raw source files I use, if you want to try them yourself:

-2 EV: https://www.dropbox.co​m/s/kfc9splq7mm3yjj/3.​CR2?dl=0

0 EV: https://www.dropbox.co​m/s/a4c1kx35szqv5nk/5.​CR2?dl=0

+2 EV: https://www.dropbox.co​m/s/gfyn4zwkoueh5wb/7.​CR2?dl=0

This is a simple scene, one that I would think is typical of a landscape with what I would call medium dynamic range - if you try hard enough, you can squeeze an acceptable image out of this -2 EV Canon 5DII image file. The scene has tree branches that were moving in the wind, so it is also a good data set to test ghosting removal.

Have fun! If you manage to get them to produce non-artifacted output, please post the result here and explain how you did it. The major issue is in the sky - there are colored bright blue haloes around the tree branches and the lower part of the sky loses color and becomes a sickly gray.

The application is supposed to be easy to use, but I cannot undo the effect, even with all of the controls turned off. I must be incapable.

kirk

Kirk, that's interesting, especially as I have not seen it mentioned in any reviews. All "professional" reviews online have to be treated with a pinch of salt as the bracketed sets they use are not difficult enough.

Stiga wrote in post #18429113
Kirk, that's interesting, especially as I have not seen it mentioned in any reviews. All "professional" reviews online have to be treated with a pinch of salt as the bracketed sets they use are not difficult enough.

Martin I agree, that's why I test everything myself. I have not watched the Aurora videos on the MacPhun site in a while, but I seem to recall that Trey Ratcliff's demo videos all involved using a bracket of three JPEGs to make the composite images as he talked about the software. I get it, it makes the software look fast and all that. However, I think the test image sets also hide the problem I see recurring over and over in the tree-sky scene. The demo images are typically busy scenes with lots of detail and not a lot of open, smooth areas of tone.

Again, I am probably wrong or over generalizing regarding the videos, but my own testing indicates there is a problem. I hope they solve it!

kirk

Attached is a screenshot of the artifact to which I am referring. I employed deghosting on the image because of the tree branches moving between shots, and used the underexposed shot as the reference.

And here is the underexposed single raw image, converted in RPP with some local contrast added. If you load the single underexposed raw into Aurora HDR, after some effort you can achieve a somewhat acceptable image too.

kirk

Here is a screenshot image from my files of the first round of testing I did with this image set, on the initial release of Aurora. Different problems, but problems nonetheless. The deghosting has improved though.

kirk

kirkt wrote in post #18429096
I am not a beta tester. I am referring to the current version. When the application was first released, I tested it and found that it could not do this simple task. I even emailed the devs and provided them with the test files. They responded and thanked me and that was that. Apparently they have not addressed whatever the issue is in their algorithm.

Each time I get an email with a announcement that they have come out with an update, I download the trial again and run the same files through the new version. So far, there is no improvement.

Here are the three raw source files I use, if you want to try them yourself:

-2 EV: https://www.dropbox.co​m/s/kfc9splq7mm3yjj/3.​CR2?dl=0

0 EV: https://www.dropbox.co​m/s/a4c1kx35szqv5nk/5.​CR2?dl=0

+2 EV: https://www.dropbox.co​m/s/gfyn4zwkoueh5wb/7.​CR2?dl=0

This is a simple scene, one that I would think is typical of a landscape with what I would call medium dynamic range - if you try hard enough, you can squeeze an acceptable image out of this -2 EV Canon 5DII image file. The scene has tree branches that were moving in the wind, so it is also a good data set to test ghosting removal.

Have fun! If you manage to get them to produce non-artifacted output, please post the result here and explain how you did it. The major issue is in the sky - there are colored bright blue haloes around the tree branches and the lower part of the sky loses color and becomes a sickly gray.

The application is supposed to be easy to use, but I cannot undo the effect, even with all of the controls turned off. I must be incapable.

kirk

Thank for the reply, Kirk. I won't be having fun because I see no reason to waste time on the app. To be honest, the challenge factor of your exposure set is mild compared to some things I produce. So if it won't work on yours, sure ain't 'gonna work on mine.

I'm wondering how luminosity masking would do. I recently abandoned Raya Pro and purchased the Benz product, but cannot test it myself because I have not had time to learn to use it. IMHO, the inability to process ghosting was the downfall of Oloneo. They tried, but just couldn't get it to work.

Oh, and as for your examples, add haloing. Somewhat substantial in my opinion.

Thanks for your time. It helped many of us save time by not wasting it on what appears to be a flawed app.

I would encourage folks who are interested to try it for themselves, really. I do not mean to discourage people outright, it just does not work for me, so I shared my experience with it.

As for luminosity masking, Aurora HDR actually has a zone system type luminosity mask engine built in - with a selection interface sort of like Nik SFX. You can use layers to composite your original source images back into the HDR result, and you can choose multiple "zones" to make a mask to do so. I have not really used the function.

Lumenzia is an evolving product that I have been using since it first came out. The author continues to refine and update the panel and it does an amazing amount of stuff, really really well. Not for everyone, for sure. Take a look at the tutorial videos - Greg does a good job at trying to demonstrate the various functions with in-depth video - you can access them in the help portion of the panel.

Sorry to hijack the thread on this.

kirk

kirkt wrote in post #18429454
I would encourage folks who are interested to try it for themselves, really. I do not mean to discourage people outright, it just does not work for me, so I shared my experience with it.

As for luminosity masking, Aurora HDR actually has a zone system type luminosity mask engine built in - with a selection interface sort of like Nik SFX. You can use layers to composite your original source images back into the HDR result, and you can choose multiple "zones" to make a mask to do so. I have not really used the function.

Lumenzia is an evolving product that I have been using since it first came out. The author continues to refine and update the panel and it does an amazing amount of stuff, really really well. Not for everyone, for sure. Take a look at the tutorial videos - Greg does a good job at trying to demonstrate the various functions with in-depth video - you can access them in the help portion of the panel.

Sorry to hijack the thread on this.

kirk

You didn't hijack it. The subject matter is Aurora and you stayed with it.

And I will agree. People should not take anything anybody says in any forum as gospel. They should try stuff for themselves. However, your comments were very useful. You identified the apps weak spots. When testing, outdoor landscape shots with movement will be the first thing tested. If it fails that, there will be no reason to continue testing.

And as an aside, agree about Lumenzia. I carefully researched LM masks. The one consistent comment was about Benz's incredible free training. That's why I purchased it.

Thanks for your help and invaluable input, Kirk. And thanks for the OP, MCAsan. Previous to this thread, I'm sure many were unfamiliar with Aurora. Probably because it was Mac-based. But with the new 2018 also being made available to Windows users, it is something people need to know about.

While posting the images here may be interesting, wouldn't a better approach be to post them at https://www.facebook.c​om/groups/macphunphoto​graphy/ where Alex (Macphun COO) and his staff can examine them move towards a solution? I doubt we can solve the problem here.