3 stages

Hi folks,

I've been experimenting a little with post processing and thought I'd ask for some feedback.

I took this photo with the intention of giving it a makeover in the post processing stage:

I like #3 !!! You did a good job. It doesnt look over processed to me.

It doesn't look overprocessed, but it doesn't look so 'real' anymore to my eyes either. Infact, that's why I moved away from using Photomatix as a base tone mapper. I do everything manually now and get much more 'realistic' results whilst also enhancing the dynamic range of the image.

The final shot you have there is a perfectly fine example of an HDR image with great pop, but I find it somewhat lacks realism. Personal tastes, though.

I think I'm beginning to come around to your way of thinking, Colin. When I first encountered HDR images I really hated them. Most of the ones I saw at the time looked completely OTT with surreal colours and nightmarish processing.

However as I learn how my camera works I realise that it's impossible to get some images without having to post process, and Photomatix is probably the quickest way to achieve some "pop" or impact, at the expense of realism.

It's not always a bad thing, but I want to start making my photographs look like an enhanced version of what I saw at the time. I think I'm going to have to look into manually processing my images to bring out more dynamic range and detail.

Time to brush up on my PS skills

Nicely done
Love the final and you started with a very nice photo.

JoYork wrote in post #7022565
I think I'm beginning to come around to your way of thinking, Colin. When I first encountered HDR images I really hated them. Most of the ones I saw at the time looked completely OTT with surreal colours and nightmarish processing.

However as I learn how my camera works I realise that it's impossible to get some images without having to post process, and Photomatix is probably the quickest way to achieve some "pop" or impact, at the expense of realism.

It's not always a bad thing, but I want to start making my photographs look like an enhanced version of what I saw at the time. I think I'm going to have to look into manually processing my images to bring out more dynamic range and detail.

Time to brush up on my PS skills

Have you tried a B&W conversion with that final shot you posted there? I think it would look a-w-e-s-o-m-e.

If you're happy with the way that final shot came out, then that's what's important. Different people have different tastes when it comes to HDR, and I guess mine is that I only really enjoy ones which increase the dynamic range without making it look 'unreal'. A bit extreme you might be thinking, and I'd be inclined to agree for sure. On the other hand, many others use the means of obtaining HDR to also make the image look a little poppy - at the expensive of realism - which is perfectly fine of course. I think that final image you posted there is very pleasing on the eye. The colour cast you introduced and the scene itself reminds me of battlefield Europe during WWII. Don't ask.

When I first started with HDR, I went through the same route as you. I used a few programs, settled on Photomatix and often ended up with the results demonstrated in your #2 image. But I wasn't very happy with that. So I investigated PP-ing of my own and often end up with images resembling your #3. Basically, poppy, pleasing to the eye images. That was absolutely fine to me (and still is), but if you get used to only being able to obtain those sorts of conversions, you can become stuck when all you want one day for a particular photo is to just increase the dynamic range. In other words, sometimes you may want to just simply make the original image look like it has a little more dynamic range, without any sort of fancy conversion into a poppy, fancy, a-little-unreal version. In those situations, the skills of being able to increase the DR without resorting to software like Photomatix (which often 'artifialise' things) become very important.

Right, I've just used this tutorial to see how easy it is to make an HDR image using Photoshop.

Here's how a recent photograph of York Minster came out using Photomatix and then some PP with Photoshop and various filters:

JoYork wrote in post #7022803
the Photoshop image looks cleaner and the Photomatix one looks more fantasy. The Photoshop one is probably more realistic but the Photomatix one looks more arty.

And which one looks BETTER for any given image is going to depend!

I am personally very fond of the look of the final render above. It does add some noise and it does smudge the luminosity in spots, but that's the look of it. If I were going to frame this shot, I might even add some blur to it to soften it and give it the aged look.

In the York Minster shot, I think the PM image looks better than the PS image.

As far as your original post, I liked the original composition better. The lines lead you into the image better in the first shot. The only distortion that needs fixing, that I see, is the upper left building. other than that I like the composition a lot.
Personally I like the second image the best. It has an attention getting look to it while still retaining a bit of reality. While the third one really is a good looking image it's quite a ways from reality. What were you after with the image? Who is to say what direction you should take in your PP efforts? Certainly not I or anyone else on POTN. Are you looking for the widest acceptance in your images? If so, I would abandon HDR altogether as most people do not care for HDR. if you're looking to maximize YOUR own enjoyment of your images, then process in a way that best suits YOUR desires and tastes. That is what I have been doing of late and I am much happier with my photos. not everyone is going to agree with your taste, who cares.

I think all the images in discussion here could stand on their own. It all depends on the audience. Personally I enjoyed looking at each and every version. I enjoyed them enough that I felt compelled to write this long-winded reply too.

theague wrote in post #7032657
In the York Minster shot, I think the PM image looks better than the PS image.

As far as your original post, I liked the original composition better. The lines lead you into the image better in the first shot. The only distortion that needs fixing, that I see, is the upper left building. other than that I like the composition a lot.
Personally I like the second image the best. It has an attention getting look to it while still retaining a bit of reality. While the third one really is a good looking image it's quite a ways from reality. What were you after with the image? Who is to say what direction you should take in your PP efforts? Certainly not I or anyone else on POTN. Are you looking for the widest acceptance in your images? If so, I would abandon HDR altogether as most people do not care for HDR. if you're looking to maximize YOUR own enjoyment of your images, then process in a way that best suits YOUR desires and tastes. That is what I have been doing of late and I am much happier with my photos. not everyone is going to agree with your taste, who cares.

I think all the images in discussion here could stand on their own. It all depends on the audience. Personally I enjoyed looking at each and every version. I enjoyed them enough that I felt compelled to write this long-winded reply too.

I agree 100%. Especially on the composition. while the crop on the third isn't bad. The first two really gave you a sense of direction into the photo.

The third version of F.R. Stubbs is amazing. Very nice work.

Thanks folks. I think I sometimes spend too long on an image and can't see the wood for the trees.

Right now I'm going back to photos I took in the summer and re-processing them. It's useful to come back to an older photo with fresh eyes.

And you're right about doing what makes me happy. I remember reading an interview with Ricky Gervais where he said he writes comedy that makes him laugh and if only a small percentage of people get it then great. He's not going to write for the mainstream because he'd feel like a sell out. He's right.

that 3rd picture looks great.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

I vote for the third version also. It almost looks like an illustration rather than a photograph. Nice work!