HDR in CS5

Was just fooling around with a new ball-head I got yesterday. I wasn't planning on taking any photos, just seeing how the Arca-Swiss plate that came with it fit my 70-200 lens' foot and had enough daylight (and room) to take a few pictures of an 11x14 inch print of my wife on my "desk" (place to put stuff and use as anything but a desk). Nice picture, matt finish, no glass, so I figured it would photograph well.

Having just gotten CS5, I figured I'd try to take a few pictures since I had the camera mounted on the tripod, had the photo (old film photo that was restored beautifully in Lightroom (not by me).

I used 5 or 6 different exposures and followed the directions....it seemed to work as it is supposed to...I think it even named the file in part "HDR".

The result was horrible. The properly exposed photo (and even those one step up and one down) seemed more vibrant, better color, sharper...everything was better than my CS5 "HDR".

I did try to fix the "HDR"..not wanting to waste much time on it I just used the auto corrections for color, contrast, etc....I did put slightly more time into trying to sharpen the file since it was so much worse than the original I was curious if I could even get it near where it was.....tried a few ways (USM, sharpen, etc.)...The pictures just looked very dull.

Now as opposed to the dismal results I got with the CS5 "HDR" pics.....I've been playing with the Photomatrix trials for a while (both the "pro" and the "basic" (or whatever it's called..three exposure max). I haven't done much with the "Pro" version for lack of patience...the basic seems to give nice results and the tone mapping (which I don't really understand, but makes for interesting results) is easy to manipulate...the "Pro" version I haven't figured out yet.

So I guess what I'm asking here is (for one thing)... should I expect better images from using the HDR in CS5 than what I got? (Obviously I should...I have to assume user error)..But is Photomatrix (sp?) just a better way to get good HDR results since it's a dedicated program to do one thing while CS5 does a trillion things?

Also....Photomatrix saves images in it's own format. I haven't used it in a while, but I know I can re-save them somehow as Jpegs so they can be viewed with any software. (Forgot how I did it, but it couldn't have been hard - I have a folder of maybe 50 "keepers" called "HDR" and they are all Jpeg files).

When I went to save the HDR I did today with CS5, my choices in file typed were very limited. So I chose to save as a TIF file....size with a 10mp camera? 157MB !!!!!

And other than in CS5, I could view it with MS Live, and I forget what else I tried...I assume anything that would open a Tiff file.....but it looked like a negative using the the MS program....then I tried viewing with some other program, and the aspect ratio was distorted (picture was stretched).

I'm again assuming user error...in fact I'd bet my life on it. I guess my next question (answers to other stuff welcome) is if I want to do HDR photos and take them more seriously than I have (just shooting the little lake behind my house with it's fountain, houses across the way...getting dramatic skies with the tone mapping...getting dramatic dynamic range with the constantly changing light in S. Florida (raining one minute with a black sky...sunny 5 minutes later..etc.), is Photomatrix the way to go as opposed to CS5?

And while I don't understand "tone mapping" is it something that CS5 can do?

Lastly...is the "Pro" version of Photomatrix worth three times the price of the basic version? (assuming I learned how to use it)...or is it "overkill"?

Unless I'm mistaken, it seems (from what little I know about the "pro" version is I can use more exposures to get more dynamic range....forget how many, but more than 3 exposures in the "basic" version......but assuming I can get it right in CS5, I could put together as many exposures as I want and then run them through either version of Photomatrix...or is that wrong thinking on my part? (say get 5 exposures in three groups using CS5..I could ..I guess...have 15 different exposures (if I figured how how to do it with Photoshop) and P-Matrix would just see three? Am I off base here?

Suggestions? Thoughts?

One other (semi-off topic) question...regarding shooting objects in minimal motion...Before I realized the shortcomings of PS Elements, I bought that since I have been using the original CS and felt it was more time consuming to use than what I want to bury myself in...So after trying Elements and feeling it was more "user freindly" than old CS I had, I bough it..then realized it's easy to use in good part because it does a lot, but not as well as CS.

But it has some cool features (or so I thought, like "magic extractor" which CS didn't and even in CS5, I think it's a plug in (the selection tool seems to work as well or better hidden in the Magic Wand).

Anyway, a feature of Elements 8 that they were publicizing is they show a demo of a photo taken at night with exposure set properly for the background (streetlights, neon signs, whatever). Then flash is used for the foreground - in their example, living, breathing human - Seems to me that just merging the person with the background wouldn't work if the person moved a bit...I even asked someone at Adobe sales (probably the wrong person to ask) and they said "it doesn't matter"...but in my (limited) experience ...just a few quick tries..it does matter. Is there a trick to getting it right? Or does the person in the forground really need to be perfectly still - dead? Or at least not breathing?

Using exposure bracketing with landscapes I can get three different exposures in a half a second, so even hand-held, the camera isn't going to move too much - and I realize the software will align minor movement...but turning on the flash means moving the camera to some measurable degree. I tried with both my 40D and SX10 IS...No luck with their "magic" merging of ambient background and then flash-lit foreground. Again, I haven't spent much time playing with this...my "test subject" is my son who has no patience and no interest. So that means very little opportunity. (Self portraits at night using a tripod would seem impossible to get myself into the same exact position...but Adobe says it can be done..????).

Again...thanks for any input. I realize I asked a lot, and certainly don't expect anyone to address each issue, but one here, one there..it adds up.

TIA

Curiously Yours,
D.

Are you saying you took photos of an 11 x 14" print and tried to convert that to HDR? Or did I parse that wrong?

If you want to shoot HDR's, use Photomatix Pro. Also, buy Tony Sweet's dvd on HDR. He is actually showing you how to use Photomatix Pro in the dvd as well as capturing the HDR images. Take note that three images will not be enough in many instances. Some will require 5, 7, or more images. Also remember that not all scenes are suitable for HDR.

GSansoucie wrote in post #10334625
Are you saying you took photos of an 11 x 14" print and tried to convert that to HDR? Or did I parse that wrong?

LOL....No, you "parsed" correctly (great word).

There was no attempt at all an to expand dynamic range - I don't believe in magic. Getting something from nothing...

What's on the print is all there could ever be...The only reason I even clicked the shutter was I was curious about the CS5's "HDR" software. I had no intention of taking a picture at all...as I said, i was just checking the balance of a lens on a new quick release plate....and happened to look through the viewfinder and there was the photo..almost perfectly framed.

I just got CS5 a few days ago, and was thinking about taking it's "HDR" for a spin, so to see how it worked (not to get a result), I took the exposures of the printed photo..it was pure coincidence. I just wanted to see how the HDR feature worked and I was too tired to go outside and bracket a few shots (though it was a good time..sun was just about setting).

I expected the result (if the HDR software worked) to look virtually identical to the most properly exposed image...no better, no worse...Instead I got much worse. Lost color saturation and contrast. Had what I can only describe as a washed out look...so knowing it had to be user error, I figured asking here might give me a clue.

DANATTHEROCK wrote in post #10334635
If you want to shoot HDR's, use Photomatix Pro. Also, buy Tony Sweet's dvd on HDR. He is actually showing you how to use Photomatix Pro in the dvd as well as capturing the HDR images. Take note that three images will not be enough in many instances. Some will require 5, 7, or more images. Also remember that not all scenes are suitable for HDR.

Thanks..I'll look into the Tony Sweet dvd....I'm well aware that three images can be quite limiting...which is why I was curious about the ability of CS5 which can handle more (not sure if there's a limit...I haven't fooled with it yet except for the one instance I described last night that was every kind of disaster).

And yes, I'm well aware that scenes need to have their intrinsic dynamic range to make for a good "HDR" image. In fact I'm looking forward to shooting an album cover sometime this summer and we were thinking of going all out with contrast..(having to do with the title track of the album). I was thinking of superimposing the talent in a high contrast black and white shot over a vivid..possibly HDR color shot (if I can get the HDR effect I envision).

I'm not sure what kind of results I'd end up with, but I was hoping to be able to set up time exposure so I could have frames with sunrise to sunset lighting and even try some long exposure night-time frames..The moon can really be a wild-card...I've had it ruin some night shots and make some over the years...whatever, the more frames I can work with the merrier. Once I have the frames I can start with the trial and error phase... I just know three images won't get anything close to what I'm envisioning.

I am curious about the tone mapping...I see what it does, but I don't understand what it's really about. If Photoshop has it or not...etc.

I read a few explanations, but even Wikipedia's explanation was hard to follow - and they seem to generally simplify things to a good degree, so I'm obviously a long way right now from where I'd hope to be for this shoot if I'm going to try to add more contrast with HDR.

The Tony Sweet dvd sounds just like what I may need. So thanks again for the heads up! Google him and found this link http://www.tonysweet.c​om/page_store.html - is the disk "HDR with the black label the disk you are talking about? Or the two disk set?

Peace,
D.

Learn a little bit more behind the concept of HDR imaging, file formats and the necessary post-production required and I think a lot of your questions will be answered. Here is a good place to start:

http://www.hdrlabs.com​/tutorials/index.html

CS5 gives very good results in terms of merging and tonemapping. If you try to merge and tonemap a set of exposures that encompasses very little dynamic range, you will typically get very poor results. Try the HDR tonemapping operation on just a single image from your (inherently) low dynamic range scene set and see if that gets you closer to what you were envisioning.

Saving your HDR (32 bit) files in TIFF is pretty inefficient - you can try .psd, .hdr or .exr with better results.

Explore the HDRLabs site I linked you to - there is a whole page of pretty much every available HDR app, most with free trials. Picturenaut, which is a free HDR merging and tonemapping app, is featured and hosted there as well. It is an excellent, fast and high-quality app, although those looking for the Photomatix "look" may not have much enthusiasm for it.

Tonemapping is the conversion of HDR data into the LDR (low dynamic range) realm where it can be displayed and printed. Photoshop's tonemapping takes place when you change the bit depth of the HDR image from 32 down to 16 or 8 (Image > Mode menu item). Whatever application and tonemapping operator you chose, it is a necessary step in the HDR workflow because HDR data typically cannot be displayed in its 32bit form, as the dynamic range of the luminance data is greater than that of the display media. So, tonemapping is an operation that compresses and maps the high dynamic range data down into the 16 and 8 bit universe. It is like Levels or Curves on steroids (levels and curves are just ways to remap the distribution of your LDR data).

Kirk

kirkt wrote in post #10337198
Learn a little bit more behind the concept of HDR imaging, file formats and the necessary post-production required and I think a lot of your questions will be answered. Here is a good place to start:

http://www.hdrlabs.com​/tutorials/index.html

CS5 gives very good results in terms of merging and tonemapping. If you try to merge and tonemap a set of exposures that encompasses very little dynamic range, you will typically get very poor results. Try the HDR tonemapping operation on just a single image from your (inherently) low dynamic range scene set and see if that gets you closer to what you were envisioning.

Saving your HDR (32 bit) files in TIFF is pretty inefficient - you can try .psd, .hdr or .exr with better results.

Explore the HDRLabs site I linked you to - there is a whole page of pretty much every available HDR app, most with free trials. Picturenaut, which is a free HDR merging and tonemapping app, is featured and hosted there as well. It is an excellent, fast and high-quality app, although those looking for the Photomatix "look" may not have much enthusiasm for it.

Tonemapping is the conversion of HDR data into the LDR (low dynamic range) realm where it can be displayed and printed. Photoshop's tonemapping takes place when you change the bit depth of the HDR image from 32 down to 16 or 8 (Image > Mode menu item). Whatever application and tonemapping operator you chose, it is a necessary step in the HDR workflow because HDR data typically cannot be displayed in its 32bit form, as the dynamic range of the luminance data is greater than that of the display media. So, tonemapping is an operation that compresses and maps the high dynamic range data down into the 16 and 8 bit universe. It is like Levels or Curves on steroids (levels and curves are just ways to remap the distribution of your LDR data).

Kirk

Thanks Kirk...

I guess my brain luckily didn't retain whatever I did yesterday..so sometimes forgetting (bad stuff) works well.

Today I tried just a simple three shot bracket (two stops up and two down) and ran it though the HDR program in CS5 and I got quite nice results.

Lots of trial and error, but I expect that until I catch up with some reading (I'll look at the link you so kindly provided when done with this response and take it from there) -and of course a lot of experimentation.

I not only used the three shots I took today (not worth posting...I realized I used too much "radius" and the blue sky seems to have a white frame around it..need to play more and see what works.... but I also used the three images that Photomatix provides (canal in Venice) and used them in Photoshop (CS5), Elements 8 (not sure if it's really HDR) and in Photomatix...I did notice that using 32 bit was very subdued..16 and 8 looked pretty much identical.

Anyway, I'm enthused that the CS5 seems quite capable...and without spending another $100 I suppose I could process images in CS5 and then re-do them using the Photomatix "light" if I want to get the "grunge" and "painterly" effects and whatever else "over the top" things it does.....if necessary.

Today I got some pretty dramatic results just using the sliders and curves in CS5. Without making it look "grungy" (their term, not mine, nor is it my preferred look).

I suppose like anything else in life (photography being a microcosm of "life" for me) - like everyone I want to know it all in one simple 5 minute lesson. But I know better and while I'm not the most patient guy in the world, I've faced a lot of years of reality and accept that developing skills takes time and effort (as opposed to too many here IMO that believe they can buy talent and/or experience by plunking down their grocery money on a new camera body every time something new is released).


Anyway, thanks again, and here's the examples of what I got using CS5 and also PS Elements 8 as opposed to Photocmatix - CS5 on my first legitimate attempt.....images supplied by Photomatix.

Elements didn't give me a dramatic HDR, but I did it a few weeks back when I got the program and my guess is I either did it wrong, or I just used the "photomerge" which isn't really an HDR process...not even sure if Elements HAS an HDR process Still, it did give me more perceived dynamic range than the normal exposure (or the three Photomatix sends out with their trial software.

Elements 8:

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