Waterfall - Playing with HDR

I don't do well with HDR, but shot this waterfall last week with plenty of bracketing. Actually, I was there an hour before sunset, and took lots of fixed shots to see where the light would work best.

The first is the only one I have processed normally at this point, and shows the subject in a fairly normal shot. Yes, all are time exposures.
1.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I like #1, because it is an all-natural shot and what I would expect to see if I were shooting it.

I don't know why, but I really like #4. I think it just jumps out and says "Look at me!" I'm not sure it looks HDR as much as just "worked" a lot.

#2 & #3 are great for showing everything, but I would prefer a little more contrast. This is the same issue I run into with my own HDRs. I need to find time to learn to use the software correctly.

All-in-all, great looking shots! I look forward to hearing what others have to say.

Not sure you really needed HDR in this one, not like the scene benefits from extra stops, nor was the original photo that bad to begin with (a bit dark maybe).

Took the liberty of just running your original though photoshop for a few seconds, just gradient filter to increase brightness and contrast at the bottom, then some highlights/shadows to bring up the shadows and drop the highlights a bit.

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

THis image appears to be a good candidate for combining the original single exposure with a tonemapped version that brings out a little more local contrast. As said above, I'm not sure you needed the full HDR treatment for this scene. Here is an example of the blend:

Gentlemen. Thank you for the comments. Kirk, I've looked at lots of your posts in the past. Love your work for sure.

First, I didn't go to this shoot to get an HDR. It was just an idea after looking at them and thinking I might be able to do something with them that I could live with. Most of my early attempts have looked pretty poor, or at least not satisfactory to me. I agree. This image does NOT lend itself well to HDR.

That said, I was sort of impressed that I was able to run it though both programs and not totally ruin it like I have others. It is something I wasn't ashamed of.

I agree with all three of you that it needs more contrast. I added a little, but not enough in the ACR and PS PP work. I thought at the time that I should have done some curves work on it, but I ran out of time and wanted to get at least some comments on them.

Basroil, I agree about the gradient. It is one of my favorite tools. In fact, I tend to use it so often that I think I over use it. It works though, and is easy! Nice job.

Kirk, I really like your blend, and that is a look that I would love to have come up with myself. Nice work. I'm going to spend some time trying to achieve that. Did you use my Photomatix shot, or did you run it on the orignal? Never mind. Ok, I re-read your comment. The sun is in the original. Are you saying the PM version is only 20% opacity, or the original is only 20%?

To tell the truth, I don't know which of these I like the best. For nice natural results (where I lean), basroil has it. But for great effect, kirk has it too!

Thanks, guys. I didn't figure these were going to bring many comments, and I think the comments come from a couple of the best.

Gary McDuffie wrote in post #8685432
Gentlemen. Thank you for the comments. Kirk, I've looked at lots of your posts in the past. Love your work for sure.

First, I didn't go to this shoot to get an HDR. It was just an idea after looking at them and thinking I might be able to do something with them that I could live with. Most of my early attempts have looked pretty poor, or at least not satisfactory to me. I agree. This image does NOT lend itself well to HDR.

That said, I was sort of impressed that I was able to run it though both programs and not totally ruin it like I have others. It is something I wasn't ashamed of.

I agree with all three of you that it needs more contrast. I added a little, but not enough in the ACR and PS PP work. I thought at the time that I should have done some curves work on it, but I ran out of time and wanted to get at least some comments on them.

Basroil, I agree about the gradient. It is one of my favorite tools. In fact, I tend to use it so often that I think I over use it. It works though, and is easy! Nice job.

Kirk, I really like your blend, and that is a look that I would love to have come up with myself. Nice work. I'm going to spend some time trying to achieve that. Did you use my Photomatix shot, or did you run it on the orignal? Never mind. Ok, I re-read your comment. The sun is in the original. Are you saying the PM version is only 20% opacity, or the original is only 20%?

To tell the truth, I don't know which of these I like the best. For nice natural results (where I lean), basroil has it. But for great effect, kirk has it too!

Thanks, guys. I didn't figure these were going to bring many comments, and I think the comments come from a couple of the best.

Just means you need to play around more and post a few more variations of that shot for us

basroil wrote in post #8686215
Just means you need to play around more and post a few more variations of that shot for us

Well, I just made another attempt. This is another run at #3 above. I did some curves adjust for contrast and slight levels, both in ACR only. Saved from PS as jpg. A little smaller to be practical. It may have come out a little over saturated.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

Gary McDuffie wrote in post #8686329
Well, I just made another attempt. This is another run at #3 above. I did some curves adjust for contrast and slight levels, both in ACR only. Saved from PS as jpg. A little smaller to be practical. It may have come out a little over saturated.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

\

Thanks.

Bit over saturated, but biggest issue is the blue and green blades of grass together.Apply a sponge or other artistic filter over the image and it would look like a painting for sure though

basroil wrote in post #8686366
Bit over saturated, but biggest issue is the blue and green blades of grass together.Apply a sponge or other artistic filter over the image and it would look like a painting for sure though

But is the contrast handled a little better now? I'm liking this version, but may toss it back in ACR and pull back saturation a tad to suit me. Interesting concept about the texture. Might be worth a shot. Thanks.

Gary McDuffie wrote in post #8686385
But is the contrast handled a little better now? I'm liking this version, but may toss it back in ACR and pull back saturation a tad to suit me. Interesting concept about the texture. Might be worth a shot. Thanks.

contrast seems good. You should probably run it though an HLS channel mixer like the one in LR2 rather than just overall saturation. That way you can bring aqua to green and lower the purple/magenta tones. The yellow is fine, and bringing it any lower may actually make it look odd.

basroil wrote in post #8686418
contrast seems good. You should probably run it though an HLS channel mixer like the one in LR2 rather than just overall saturation. That way you can bring aqua to green and lower the purple/magenta tones. The yellow is fine, and bringing it any lower may actually make it look odd.

I don't know what HLS is, and I don't have LR. I tried pulling the blue channel down 20 in saturation, 20 in luminosity, and then resaved. Not a lot of difference, but didn't hurt.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED