Indoor HDR (3 pictures)

These high dynamic range scenes were captured with 3 shots, 2EV apart.
The blending of the RAW data was done through Zero Noise.
The tone mapping was done manually with 2 curves usually (bright and contrast).

The goal was to capture the entire DR of the scene, eliminating any trace of noise and with a natural looking in mind. That is why higher luminance areas are clearly more luminous, although not blown.

Excellent captures- this is using the software you wrote?

awesome. Is your program in english too? I didn't really read enough through it...

I can't read zero noise link but I'd sure like to have it.

Wow, really like the staircase shot. What lens did you use?

tcc wrote in post #7673401
Wow, really like the staircase shot. What lens did you use?

I used Canon 350D + Canon 10-22 in all shots. In the staircase at 10mm if I am not wrong.

Thanks for your comments. I have to be clear about Zero Noise: this program is just a RAW blender. It summarizes all dynamic range found in several RAW files with two abilities:
1. Minimum noise (chosing high SNR pixels) + maximum sharpness (avoiding any progressive blending)
2. No processing at all (that means no exposure, contrast, saturation,... corrections applied).

So the resulting image from ZN is virgin, but very dull and terribly underexposed, needing tone mapping. The good news is that is also tremendously robust against any strong post processing; shadows can be lifted as much as you want without any posterization or noise appearing.

For instance this is what the output of Zero Noise for the last image looked like:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

I also have a 10-22 and was wondering if you stand relatively close to your "subjects"? I'm still trying to get the hang of this UW lens.

tcc wrote in post #7673740
I also have a 10-22 and was wondering if you stand relatively close to your "subjects"? I'm still trying to get the hang of this UW lens.

To get the best of the 10-22, I did some tests and found that the best aperture tradeoff between Depth of Field and diffraction is at f/11, so I always shoot at that aperture. At closer apertures (f/16 for example) diffraction starts to quickly reduce sharpness.

I usually focus at 1 or 2m behind the hyperfocal distance (I have the hyperfocal distances written down on a piece of paper for several focal lengths). On indoor shooting I simply focus the closer subject of relevance because the DOF requirements don't reach infinite.

Of course all that applies only on tripod shooting. If you cannot afford using a tripod you won't be able to set f/11 either, at least in indoor shooting.

BR

Great images! Wish I could read the tutorial.

_GUI_ wrote in post #7673862
To get the best of the 10-22, I did some tests and found that the best aperture tradeoff between Depth of Field and diffraction is at f/11, so I always shoot at that aperture. At closer apertures (f/16 for example) diffraction starts to quickly reduce sharpness.

I usually focus at 1 or 2m behind the hyperfocal distance (I have the hyperfocal distances written down on a piece of paper for several focal lengths). On indoor shooting I simply focus the closer subject of relevance because the DOF requirements don't reach infinite.

Of course all that applies only on tripod shooting. If you cannot afford using a tripod you won't be able to set f/11 either, at least in indoor shooting.

BR

Thanks BR that really helped. Since the 350D is a 1.6 crop like the XTI/400D I have do you mind sharing the info you have re: focal length vs hyperfocal distance?

amazing work! wish I can read your tutorial as well

tcc wrote in post #7674286
Thanks BR that really helped. Since the 350D is a 1.6 crop like the XTI/400D I have do you mind sharing the info you have re: focal length vs hyperfocal distance?

I simply used the Dofmaster online calculator.

BR

Trek_203 wrote in post #7675824
amazing work! wish I can read your tutorial as well

Strange, when I followed the link there was a nice Union Jack to click on which translated it for me. OK not the best translation but you get the gist.

Very interesting looking program by the way, the pictures look good.

Wow, this is stunning. Architectural Digest is holding on line 1, sir!