Step Up to HDR.

Canon 5D. 16-35f/2.8II L. HDR.

i can see the intent to use tonemapping to give cool 'effects', but this shot doesn't quite require HDR as its not dynamic enough. you could capture all the detail in one exposure.

I agree

mdgrwl wrote in post #11109591
i can see the intent to use tonemapping to give cool 'effects', but this shot doesn't quite require HDR as its not dynamic enough. you could capture all the detail in one exposure.

Read my HDR tutorial which I wrote up for Planet Neil: http://neilvn.com …2010/07/11/hdr-technique/

This will explain the technique to you.....and why it's done on such photos as the one posted here.

A bit of a dumb question, but is there a way to use that autobracketing feature to get more than three exposures at once? I'd like to try that technique, but clouds tend to move while I set the exposures... that's only a problem when taking pictures of landscapes, though. (and by landscapes I mean more distant buildings)

The Devil wrote in post #11118374
A bit of a dumb question, but is there a way to use that autobracketing feature to get more than three exposures at once? I'd like to try that technique, but clouds tend to move while I set the exposures... that's only a problem when taking pictures of landscapes, though.

Depends on what kinda camera you have. It can be done.

I like the result because it has excellent DOF, but that seems like a lot of unnecessary work for something that doesn't have such a High Dynamic Range of lighting. Couldn't you get the same results with the proper exposure in the first place on such a low dynamic object?

mdgrwl wrote in post #11109591
i can see the intent to use tonemapping to give cool 'effects', but this shot doesn't quite require HDR as its not dynamic enough. you could capture all the detail in one exposure.

I disagree. I am pretty sure a normal exposure of the same scene would look very flat and lifeless, and can easily visualize how I am sure it looked in my mind. As someone who hates the "HDR so you can see it" effect, my first thought here was to how realistic and better the image looked for it.

Concrete and stone has a lot of texture that conventional photography just cannot do justice to. Presumably because the difference between tones is subtle so that it does not come out well while tone mapping and HDR version can uncompress them more like our vision does. Regardless, there is a feeling of depth and of the light that would otherwise have been lost. Or at least that I have never seen in standard exposures of similar subjects.

Michael.

mij wrote in post #11121147
I disagree. I am pretty sure a normal exposure of the same scene would look very flat and lifeless, and can easily visualize how I am sure it looked in my mind. As someone who hates the "HDR so you can see it" effect, my first thought here was to how realistic and better the image looked for it.

Concrete and stone has a lot of texture that conventional photography just cannot do justice to. Presumably because the difference between tones is subtle so that it does not come out well while tone mapping and HDR version can uncompress them more like our vision does. Regardless, there is a feeling of depth and of the light that would otherwise have been lost. Or at least that I have never seen in standard exposures of similar subjects.

Michael.

You sir are 100% correct.

Slimdog wrote in post #11120887
Depends on what kinda camera you have. It can be done.

I take it it can't be done with my trusty ol' 400D then?
/thread digger

The Devil wrote in post #11248988
I take it it can't be done with my trusty ol' 400D then?
/thread digger

Why not? All you need to do is take multiple shots of the same object at different exposures. One or two under-exposed, one or two correct exposure and then one or two over-exposed. However, you need the software to stack and blend them into a HDR image such as the New HDR pro that is included with Photoshop CS5.
Photoshop CS5 can also make a single exposure look very similar to a multiple exposure HDR image.

Well the problem is that I can't make my camera bracket like 5 or so different exposures, only 3.
By touching the camera I could move it enough to screw up the whole image, plus if I'm taking images with clouds on 'em, the clouds will get all screwed up by moving.

The Devil wrote in post #11250756
Well the problem is that I can't make my camera bracket like 5 or so different exposures, only 3.
By touching the camera I could move it enough to screw up the whole image, plus if I'm taking images with clouds on 'em, the clouds will get all screwed up by moving.

3 is all you really need, but you can use more if you like. 3 is all my 50D does for bracketed exposure. but If I want more I adjust the exposure myself, carefully of course on a sturdy tripod. Or I can control it from my laptop without touching the camera. If there is just a little movement HDR programs such as the HDR Pro with CS5 can correct for that.

For taking images with clouds in them you can choose which exposure you want to pull the clouds from.

Sorry for my newbieness, but um... how exactly can you choose which exposure to pull clouds from? Seriously, I didn't even know you could do that.

The Devil wrote in post #11252424
Sorry for my newbieness, but um... how exactly can you choose which exposure to pull clouds from? Seriously, I didn't even know you could do that.

What PP Software are you using?

Here are a couple tutorial videos explaining HDR Pro in Photoshop CS5

http://tv.adobe.com …oshop-cs5/indepth-hdr-pro

http://tv.adobe.com …-hdr-images-with-hdr-pro/

There are many other software applications available just for HDR photography, such as this one >> http://www.hdrsoft.com​/