More A900 HDRs

Loving Photomatix so far, though still very much on the learning curve. Went on a walk of an historic part of Singapore near my house yesterday. Came back and processed these. I like the first one in particular because the HDR gave it an almost 3D-look, compared to the normally exposed shot, because of the micro-contrast enhancements I guess. Still, one could rightly argue that HDR processing wasn't needed in this case. Same is not true for the last one... old graveyard, backed by a dark curtain of trees, behind which is direct sunlight. Was hard to prevent the sky turning to a middle gray on this one, but I'm still not completely satisfied. Thanks in advance for any comments. Glenn.



On this one, I know the framing could have been better. But I decided to fix the perspective, which meant cropping only from above, so the compostion may not seem ideally balanced.





And this next one was a challenge as the subject was in deep shadow with direct sunlight behind.



--
Galleries: http://picasaweb.google.com.au/glennjude

Sony a900, a700; CZ24-70mm, SAL70-300mmG, 50mm F1.4, 100mm F2.8 macro, CZ16-80mm, KM11-18mm, SAL18-250mm

--
Rick

Very dreamy Docno!

I really like the angel image, great composition - angel, church, clouds. The HDR gives it a subtle touch combined with your shallow DOF.

Thanks for sharing!

joel*

These are really good shots, and I'm thinking of trying out HDR. Can you tell me your workflow? Do you shoot in JPG or in RAW?
--
Mike
http://mikekatz.smugmug.com

I love the angel, great shot
--
http://www.jjcrawfordstudios.zenfolio.com

I like the pictures - the composition, the HDR lighting. The subject matter is pretty interesting, too.

I am very curious about the Photomatix software. Not sure if it is just me but the top two pictures looked as if you used a diffuser filter. Did the software create the diffusion effect or is that something you added by design...

thanks,

Sam

Sorry, I meant the middle two pictures - the picture with the angel and the one with the white building.

Sam

-I like 1,2 & 4 because they look natural.

3 is more what I associated with many of the HDR's I have seen and they look odd as if they are a step away from posterisation.

One day I will get around to trying some myself but if/when I do I will be aiming for the look of your 1,2 & 4 shots.

Dave

Hi Mike -

I'm not the one who should be giving advice, as I'm only starting out myself. These were based on in-camera jpeg shots. Photomatix will also accept A900 RAWs, but of course things go a little slower. I only tried RAW once inside this programme, and I can't say I noticed a big difference, but really not enough experience with it to be sure. As far as workflow, it's just a matter of experimentation within Photomatix; what works for one image won't work for another. The only additional thing I'll occasionally do is some adjusting of levels in CS3 on the image that comes out of Photomatix. (There's also a photoshop plug-in, with some limitations, but I've yet to try it).

Photos-Mike said:

These are really good shots, and I'm thinking of trying out HDR. Can
you tell me your workflow? Do you shoot in JPG or in RAW?
--
Mike
http://mikekatz.smugmug.com

Click to expand...

--
Galleries: http://picasaweb.google.com.au/glennjude

Sony a900, a700; CZ24-70mm, SAL70-300mmG, 50mm F1.4, 100mm F2.8 macro, CZ16-80mm, KM11-18mm, SAL18-250mm

Thanks Sam - no, no filters used. The software has quite a number of settings and adjustments, many of which seem to interact with each other. I've been too lazy/excited to read the manual, so it's all trial-and-error at this point (mad scientist at the dials).

samihaha said:

I like the pictures - the composition, the HDR lighting. The subject
matter is pretty interesting, too.

I am very curious about the Photomatix software. Not sure if it is
just me but the top two pictures looked as if you used a diffuser
filter. Did the software create the diffusion effect or is that
something you added by design...

thanks,

Sam
--

Click to expand...

--
Galleries: http://picasaweb.google.com.au/glennjude

Sony a900, a700; CZ24-70mm, SAL70-300mmG, 50mm F1.4, 100mm F2.8 macro, CZ16-80mm, KM11-18mm, SAL18-250mm

I went back and looked at the mid-exposure of the images used to create shot three and I do think the original (correct exposure) is better than the third HDR image I posted. While the trees and clouds in the HDR have 'opened up' more, the building is more pallid and the dome has lost its three-dimensional appearance. So either I over-shot in #3 or the scene wasn't a good candidate for HDR. I think from now on I'll be more careful about comparing back with the original exposures. Thanks Dave

Dave Oddie said:

-I like 1,2 & 4 because they look natural.

3 is more what I associated with many of the HDR's I have seen and
they look odd as if they are a step away from posterisation.

One day I will get around to trying some myself but if/when I do I
will be aiming for the look of your 1,2 & 4 shots.

Dave

Click to expand...

--
Galleries: http://picasaweb.google.com.au/glennjude

Sony a900, a700; CZ24-70mm, SAL70-300mmG, 50mm F1.4, 100mm F2.8 macro, CZ16-80mm, KM11-18mm, SAL18-250mm

I'm normally not a fan of HDRs, but you have a great set here with such a natural look to them. They actually don't look like HDRs, but rather really well done photos.
--
yakkosmurf
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yakkosmurf/

Speaking as one who loves HDR and who uses Photomatix, I agree that the angel shot is my favorite. Great look and great composition! Not sure if the third one needed the treatment? So glad you shared and hope you'll share more over time.

--



Keith L.
Seeing The Light
Galleries - http://www.AcappellaPhotos.com

Yeah, I agree... the third one wasn't a good choice for HDR treatment. Guess I just got carried away that day But it was a good learning experience.
--
Galleries: http://picasaweb.google.com.au/glennjude

Sony a900, a700; CZ24-70mm, SAL70-300mmG, 50mm F1.4, 100mm F2.8 macro, CZ16-80mm, KM11-18mm, SAL18-250mm