Bryce Canyon Sunrise - Landscape HDR

I seem to struggle with getting HDR to look the way I'd like for landscapes. I'm curious what software others use for good landscape results... these are Photomatix. My goal is realistic HDR shots. Critique is welcomed.

Image #1 is 5 exposures. #2 is the same except for adding a 6th at 2/3 stop brighter. The 3rd image is the best I could come up with using only a single exposure... no HDR.

I like the middle one best but I am not HDR expert. The only thing I can suggest is to use a file with blue sky so that you have nice one.

Something doesn't look right... they don't look HDR at all.

I have tons of HDR from Moab and Grand Canyon, and you should be getting all the way up to "screaming red" on the dirt colors. The ones you posted look very dull and desaturated, must be something you are doing in the software.

Send me a PM if you would like to see some of my HDRs of canyon landscapes.
I can also try doing one for you, if you send me some RAWs.

When I shoot HDR landscapes, I shoot 8-10 exposures in 1/3 stop increments. But then I only usually only use 3 raws for an HDR - 4 at the most. It is critical to use the "best" exposures to get the "look". Especially when you see a sunset or sunrise, I go way under exposed, to get saturated colors in the sky. In your example, the sky is blown out. And all the foreground canyon is too dark. Do you have any raws that are more overexposed and more underexposed. You might want to try using those in Photomatix and see if you get more tonal ranges.

here is an image I was processing today that has a sunset in in, see how much detail I can eek out of the colors in the sky...

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

Im with you man - I like doing realistic HDR stuff too...

And then guess what happens... people jump in and go... THATS NOT HDR. I know, thats the point. I said realistic, not the eye searing, oversaturated, odd looking high dynamic range catastrophe that people think defines HDR. You can gain a wider spectrum, in a subtle manner, that enhances a picture but it looks normal.

#2 is the best.

LiberationFrequency wrote in post #11285174
And then guess what happens... people jump in and go... THATS NOT HDR. I know, thats the point. I said realistic, not the eye searing, oversaturated, odd looking high dynamic range catastrophe that people think defines HDR. You can gain a wider spectrum, in a subtle manner, that enhances a picture but it looks normal.

The photo I posted above was to show the colors in the sky... here is a "realistic" canyon HDR of mine... so many people on here are just plain rude.

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

Maybe the Liberation expert needs another "eye searing, oversaturated, odd looking high dynamic range catastrophe"...

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

Why are you posting all these images in someone elses topic? If you want to show yours, you should start your own topic unless the original poster asks to see yours as an example.

navydoc wrote in post #11285499
Why are you posting all these images in someone elses topic? If you want to show yours, you should start your own topic unless the original poster asks to see yours as an example.

The OP asked for some advice, specifically on canyon colors... you have a better way to discuss color that is better than showing photo examples?

Is this about learning or about people being rude to each other? ... getting bored with people on this site, many people not into sharing techniques at all.

Is there some rule in this section of the Forums, where we are not supposed to post any photos in someone's thread? If so, I must have missed it.

I thought this was the RAW, Post Processing and Printing section... where people ask and discuss post processing techniques.

KurtGoss wrote in post #11285601
The OP asked for some advice, specifically on canyon colors... you have a better way to discuss color that is better than showing photo examples?

Is this about learning or about people being rude to each other? ... getting bored with people on this site, many people not into sharing techniques at all.

Is there some rule in this section of the Forums, where we are not supposed to post any photos in someone's thread? If so, I must have missed it.

I thought this was the RAW, Post Processing and Printing section... where people ask and discuss post processing techniques.

Yes there is.

You are not really offering anything to OP (although I can see you have asked him to PM) but showing how good you are at HDR.

this thread delivers

Doug, I like the second one best, though I think these can be improved. Can you explain a bit about how you're processing? It looks like you've caught enough DR to get a killer shot, so I'm guessing it's something you are doing or more likely not doing.

Nice shots...just keep working at it and you can figure it out, read some of the techniques and tips available online. Remember..experience is the best teacher. Hang in there!!!

A lot of folks won't post here because......Some people on this site think they are the "HDR Hitler" and if you don't do it just like them then it can not be correct.....They don't ever offer to instruct someone in a kind way, all they know how to do is say how bad others hdr images are...
If they are so smart and good at it then why don't they try to help others with their knowledge instead of being so demeaning?????
If you just don't like the image...move along..If you can help the OP in a kind manner then do so, other wise...if you can't say something good and/or helpful in a kind way.....Keep your mouth shut!