HDR question

[BobT]

I'm really "green" on this subject. Is it true that the HDR feature on more of the newest camera models is designed to merge together several (2 or 3)images of the same subject at differing metering settings? The camera actually blends them together to make a "best" image which is actually a compilation of those images?

If I'm right so far.......... How quickly are these 2 or 3 similar images captured? Faster if the camera has a higher FPS rate? Does this require a tripod? OR, are the multiple images greated based on only one snap of the shutter; with the internal workings of the camera in complete control of the blending?

If this is all wrong, please explain(slowly and carefully). This sounds like just a feature that I could use; as I'm constantly struggling with metering issues.
And finally, can this be found on entry-level cameras? If so, which ones?
Thanks so much.

 

[pcassel]

The HDR feature extends the DR of the camera. That means the shot will cover a greater light range than a single shot will.

I suggest you read the DPR review of either the Pentax K7 or the Sony a550 to read about this feature in action.

You can hand hold for this feature but you need to be steady. Large movements will screw up the pic but the cameras compensate more or less for some movement. A tripod is always best, though.
--

-----
-paul

 

[BenMorrissey]

If I'm right so far.......... How quickly are these 2 or 3 similar images captured? Faster if the camera has a higher FPS rate? Does this require a tripod? OR, are the multiple images greated based on only one snap of the shutter; with the internal workings of the camera in complete control of the blending?

The speed at which the images are captured, and depend on the shutter speed available. It does not require a tripod, however, you will need steady hands if any of them are slow shots. A tripod is always beneficial though.

 

[BobT]

Thanks for responding. However, I'm still not clear on a couple of things.

Does the camera actually snap off 3or 4 shots, OR is the HDR handled based on the ONE shot taken? AND..is the K7 and A550 the only cameras that currently have this feature(entry-level)?
Thanks again.

 

[AdriaanMeijer]

Thanks for responding. However, I'm still not clear on a couple of things.

Does the camera actually snap off 3or 4 shots, OR is the HDR handled based on the ONE shot taken?

The camera will take more than one shot. So it's only handy with steady objects, not with moving subjects.

--
All in my humble opionion of course!

If I seem to talk nonsense or you can't understand me, it's probably my English

 

[ADDEMUP]

Taking HDR shots requires at least three exposures. DSLRs don't actually have an HDR feature. Most do offer bracketing which allow you to capture the same scene at different expsures. But you end up with more than one image. The HDR image is created afterwards with specialized software.

You should use a very steady tripod to take the shots. If your camera only brackets 3 shots you'll need a very sturdy tripod since you will need to manually change exposure if you want more than 3 shots to make up your HDR image. Some HDR images are made up of as many as 9 exposures.

In my experience (which is limited when it comes to HDR) hand holding the camera just doesn't work very well.

Also remember, you must leave the aperture unchanged for all shots in the sequence.
--
ADDEMUP

 

[yooperguy]

You might also be interested in the newer Sony HX1 or smaller WX1 P&S cameras that can take six images quickly, and blend them in to a single image with less noise and better DR, per their ads. However, per reviews I've read, don't pixel-peep at images, and don't print above 8x10".

I have some friends that bought the HX1 and love it. If you demand better image results, then use the traditional method described above - three or more images at + and - EV values, and process in HDR software on your computer. From the books I've read, you must lock your ISO and aperture, and only vary your shutter speed. A tripod should give the best results.

Dennis

 

[LeeTee]

Actually by bracketing and using special software (like Photomatix) any camera can be used to take images that can be HDRed. I do this all the time with my D200. I take a bracket of 3 to 5 images (usually on a tripod but sometimes handheld) and then use Photomatix to combine them.

Here are examples:





--
LeeTee
Good photographers only show you their best images, not all of their images.
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/zogger

 

[Bart Roskam]

DSLRs don't actually have an HDR feature. Most do offer bracketing which allow you to capture the same scene at different expsures. But you end up with more than one image. The HDR image is created afterwards with specialized software.

Quite on the contrary, the Pentax K-7 will generate a single jpg image from three different pictures in-camera. I heard the Sony A550 will do something similar with 2 images but I'm not quite sure about that.

http://flickr.com/photos/bartroskam/
WSSA Member#250PX

 

[Mark B.]

I'm really "green" on this subject. Is it true that the HDR feature on more of the newest camera models is designed to merge together several (2 or 3)images of the same subject at differing metering settings? The camera actually blends them together to make a "best" image which is actually a compilation of those images?

If I'm right so far.......... How quickly are these 2 or 3 similar images captured? Faster if the camera has a higher FPS rate? Does this require a tripod? OR, are the multiple images greated based on only one snap of the shutter; with the internal workings of the camera in complete control of the blending?

If this is all wrong, please explain(slowly and carefully). This sounds like just a feature that I could use; as I'm constantly struggling with metering issues.
And finally, can this be found on entry-level cameras? If so, which ones?
Thanks so much.

I strongly suggest that if combining more than 1 exposure for an HDR image that a solid tripod is used. I've seen a couple responses suggesting this can be done hand-held, but I find it hard to believe that anyone can hold a camera rock-solid enoug to get the same exact composition - certainly not as solid as a tripod. It may look good at first, but I think when combining images you'll find there is enough movement between exposures that things don't line up exactly.

Mark

 

[BalaG]

i usually take tripod with remote for HDR pictures, even though we may not need one. However the processing software can align images.. The only thing to consider is to look for moving objects in the background.

http://hdrsoft.com/

This yields good results.

 

[Charles2]

Taking HDR shots requires at least three exposures.

Is that true?

Related to this point, the purposes of stacking images is not limited to dramatic high contrasts. It can be used to show more detail and color variation. Here is a stack of two images only 1.4EV apart:



Here is a single image in the middle of the EV range:



Camera: Sigma DP2
Stacked using Picture Window Pro

 

[JudyTee]

I'm really "green" on this subject. Is it true that the HDR feature on more of the newest camera models is designed to merge together several (2 or 3)images of the same subject at differing metering settings? The camera actually blends them together to make a "best" image which is actually a compilation of those images?

If I'm right so far.......... How quickly are these 2 or 3 similar images captured? Faster if the camera has a higher FPS rate? Does this require a tripod? OR, are the multiple images greated based on only one snap of the shutter; with the internal workings of the camera in complete control of the blending?

If this is all wrong, please explain(slowly and carefully). This sounds like just a feature that I could use; as I'm constantly struggling with metering issues.
And finally, can this be found on entry-level cameras? If so, which ones?
Thanks so much.

First of all, I must admit I have no personal experience with any camera which will merge several exposures 'in-camera." While I am sure it works, it may not result in the best results. I have often tried simple merging of several differiently exposed images and the result frequently looks odd, with poor contrast. My usual method is to make five exposures, using the camera's "bracketing" feature. The exposures must vary only in shutter speed. I make a preview image by simply merging the five images. I analyze the result and then individually make changes in brightness and contrast to some or all of the original images, then make another merged image. In that way I get the best and most natural looking result.

HDR or High Dynamic Range, is a technique developed to overcome one of the most troublesome features of digital photography, that is, the inability of the camera to record the wide range of tones to be found in nature. A similar problem exists with film cameras, but the developing and printing process gives somewhat greater control over contrasts. There are programs available that do much of the work of creating a digital HDR result, and yes, some programs can create a fake HDR image from only one exposure, but it is not possible to get the best looking result in that fashion. And yes, a tripod is best, although most HDR programs allow for some aliignment of the different images.

An unfortunate part of HDR photography is that some programs allow the creation of strange looking, bizarre, "over cooked" images often referred to as "Tone Mapping." A real HDR image is quite subtle and does not readily reveal its origin.

--
Judy

 

[Charles2]

Thanks for mentioning Photomatix. The tutorial on their website has this interesting remark:

"Exposure Fusion is another way to process your bracketed photos. It is simpler than HDR tone mapping, and produce more natural-looking results [typically, as opposed to a painterly effect with tone mapping]. Additionally, fusing exposures has the advantage of reducing noise."

I guess the broader term encompassing both methods is stacking images. Exposure fusion seems to apply to the example I posted earlier in this thread.

Chacun a son gout.