HDR from a single file

*Bill wrote in post #3496593
However, in the case of the OP, and the subject of the OP, whatever you want to call it, the use of taking one image and creating several different exposures from it, create results that could not be acheived otherwise. It's a very useful tool and method to create out of the ordinary, and in some instances, breathtaking results; whether "true" HDR, or not, it produces unique images.

*CannedHeat wrote in post #3496593
Bill, with all due diplomacy and respect, I think you missed the entire point of the thread. None of the posters said the PP involved did not create a good image. The entire discussion is about what is and what is not a true hdr file. Regards, /Dan 17 Minutes Ago 09:38 AM

No the entire point of the thread went entirely in the wrong direction because I didn't take the time to ask my question correctly. I realize one image will not generate a HDR image, no matter how you process it. I should have asked how you might simulate HDR by using one image in photoshop using a single JPG based exposure.

So I created a post that started a debate, let me try, probably miserably to end it. An HDR, by definition is composed of or created by combining multiple exposures of the same subject. That is by technical definition. The original post I referred to incorrectly called his technique HDR and I repeated the error. While his post processing technique is NOT HDR, it DOES result in some interesting dynamics in the image. He also happens to have an unusual eye for wedding photography which could be debated/critiqued in his thread.

Since it appears he might be using a different software package (photomatix) to accomplish the dynamics demonstrated, I've learned what I wanted to know and I've come to the conclusion that

1. my ridculously lazy question
   
2. is easily misinterpeted
   
3. and I need to be more careful about how I ask a question.
   
4. Photomatix is what was probably used.
   
5. It could be done in Photoshop, although not as easily, using a variety of techniques.

CannedHeat wrote in post #3496567
One question:

If you have a single file that contains a finite dynamic range and produce a number of different files from it, have you extended the dynamic range of that original file beyond what was originally contained in that single file? /Dan

No you haven't. If your original file had a dynamic range of 5 stops, using software to adjust its exposure will still give you an image that still has a dynamic range of 5 stops. However, its tonal values would have changed.

droiby wrote in post #3496943
No you haven't. If your original file had a dynamic range of 5 stops, using software to adjust its exposure will still give you an image that still has a dynamic range of 5 stops. However, its tonal values would have changed.

That is correct. As to tonal value, by processing a single file in photoshop alone tonal values can be changed using curves, levels, etc. In both cases, whether using photomatix or photoshop, what comes out is exactly the same as what was put in: a low dynamic range image. /Dan

bwolford wrote in post #3496734
No the entire point of the thread went entirely in the wrong direction because I didn't take the time to ask my question correctly. I realize one image will not generate a HDR image, no matter how you process it. I should have asked how you might simulate HDR by using one image in photoshop using a single JPG based exposure.

So I created a post that started a debate, let me try, probably miserably to end it. An HDR, by definition is composed of or created by combining multiple exposures of the same subject. That is by technical definition. The original post I referred to incorrectly called his technique HDR and I repeated the error. While his post processing technique is NOT HDR, it DOES result in some interesting dynamics in the image. He also happens to have an unusual eye for wedding photography which could be debated/critiqued in his thread.

Since it appears he might be using a different software package (photomatix) to accomplish the dynamics demonstrated, I've learned what I wanted to know and I've come to the conclusion that

1. my ridculously lazy question
   
2. is easily misinterpeted
   
3. and I need to be more careful about how I ask a question.
   
4. Photomatix is what was probably used.
   
5. It could be done in Photoshop, although not as easily, using a variety of techniques.

POTN is filled with helpful, pationate, talented, and capable photographers and I'm d*&n glad to have this as a resource. So, thanks for your help.

I appreciate your efforts to enlighten the masses, along with me.

Yes, you are correct. As a person who has become proficient in both, I can clearly say that what he uses (despite him saying the same) is photomatix. The superiority of hdr processing in photomatix vs. photoshop's algorithm is another subject that has been debated here endlessly, and which I will not participate in. However, in my own experience I have clearly determined that photoshop's hdr feature (at least CS2, I don's use CS3) doesn't even come close to the output that can be achieved with photomatix. However, I am sure that in photoshop using other adjustment methods such as curves, levels, saturations, etc. you could emulate what he has achieved with photomatix. That would only be logical because an image's dynamic range would be the same despite the different applications it is called into. And theoretically, if a person was truly talented with photoshop (which I am not) they might even be able to do a better job because photoshop offers much more refined control of individual aspects as opposed to photomatix's sliders.

If your question was answered, I can only validate it with advice: get a copy of photomatix. If and when you become truly proficient in it, you can produce some spectacular results. And don't hesitate to take the next step with multiple, differing exposures. Truly extending the dynamic range can take the results even further. /Dan

Try this new HDR creator from http://www.mediachance​.com/hdri/index.html The demo is free and it works quite good. The price is very affordable , compared to other HDR programs.

marian wrote in post #3497843
Try this new HDR creator from http://www.mediachance​.com/hdri/index.html The demo is free and it works quite good. The price is very affordable , compared to other HDR programs.

I've tried other apps and did not have much luck with them. However, this one could look promising. They say they have a good anti-ghosting feature which is a relatively new development within photomatix.

If you have a chance, perhaps you could post some images created from a single input image, then some created from 3 or more different exposures. /Dan

Edit: I've never been able to achieve good results with artizen, either.

In an attempt to reduce confusion out there, here's a brief explaination of HDR...

In what most people refer to as "HDR photography", there are two separate processes:

1. Creation of a HDR file
   
2. Tone mapping
   

Droiby,

Thanks for the explaination and clarity. I appreciate the information.

CannedHeat wrote in post #3494552
Are you sure you posted the correct link? I see some great wedding photography there, but no shots that have anything to do with hdr. /Dan

Edit: I see now (later in the thread). Single file processing in photomatix tends to add saturation and pop. But do not be confused. Although his post-processing is great, what makes these photos work is his unique style, composition and interesting angles. Up in the air above his subject, down on the ground below, etc. /Dan

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=195815

nicolerork wrote in post #3512827
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=195815

Yeah, having had a look at those results, it's definately playing around with tone mapping and a good deal of PP afterwards.

I've written a tutorial awhile ago about how to use one high quality image file (ex. RAW 16bit) to simulate tone mapping:
http://photoshoptutori​als.ws …namic-range-increase.html

It gives different results than using the Shadows/Highlights tool which tend to create a lot of glowing halos.