Five Shot Burst for HDR??

[kleks]

BlueCosmo5050,

thanks for pointing to Aurora HDR - nice software. Need to skip a lunch or three and put aside some $$ to buy it.

Best,

/kleks

 

[BG454]

Three brackets two stops apart is usually good. From a tripod, I chimp until everything is exposed in one shot or another. If they are not too far apart, I pick three to process in Photomatix. Sometimes the three are far enough apart that you need to process five brackets.

Real photographer hate HDR. Most everybody else loves it.

Most everybody else probably doesn't have a clue what HDR is all about.

Completely aside from the discussion about what is or isn't "good" HDR, I was just checking out your gallery and wanted to say you have some really nice stuff there That train with all the steam is fantastic !

Thank you sir!

 

[Dan_168]

Three brackets two stops apart is usually good. From a tripod, I chimp until everything is exposed in one shot or another. If they are not too far apart, I pick three to process in Photomatix. Sometimes the three are far enough apart that you need to process five brackets.

Real photographer hate HDR. Most everybody else loves it.

I thought real photographer hates Photomatix and everyone else love those surreal look. LOL.

 

[Owenmorris]

View attachment 9324f4700c0e44ebb0cd6ac5ddd5e44c.jpg
Costa Rica May 2017

I'm no expert....and certainly no professional....

But in my limited experience, I get the best HDR merging/blending/results when using masking (and luminosity masking) of layers in PS.....

--

Loading…

www.flickr.com

 

[Ed Rizk]

Three brackets two stops apart is usually good. From a tripod, I chimp until everything is exposed in one shot or another. If they are not too far apart, I pick three to process in Photomatix. Sometimes the three are far enough apart that you need to process five brackets.

Real photographer hate HDR. Most everybody else loves it.

I thought real photographer hates Photomatix and everyone else love those surreal look. LOL.

For the most part, that has been my experience. I personally know a real photographer that likes it, but the vast majority on this site detest it. There are a few real photographers on the net that use it, Trey Radcliff being one that comes to mind.

I've run into a few real estate people that don't like it and at least one non photographer that's not in real estate that doesn't like it.

I have some creative (or my attempt to be creative) photos that I display on my walls and have in a portfolio book in my living room. When people pick a favorite, without my discussing types of photography, they most often pick one of the HDRs.

When I first started doing HDR, mostly for real estate, I had some flyers done without it and some done with it. While not scientifically measured, I observed prospects eyes spending more time on flyers with HDR. Two agents I work with actually counted hits on Loopnet and MLS. The HDR shots generated more than double the hits.

There are always exceptions, but generally speaking, civilians love it, and photographers hate it.

 

[Mike CH]

Three brackets two stops apart is usually good. From a tripod, I chimp until everything is exposed in one shot or another. If they are not too far apart, I pick three to process in Photomatix. Sometimes the three are far enough apart that you need to process five brackets.

Real photographer hate HDR. Most everybody else loves it.

I thought real photographer hates Photomatix and everyone else love those surreal look. LOL.

For the most part, that has been my experience. I personally know a real photographer that likes it, but the vast majority on this site detest it. There are a few real photographers on the net that use it, Trey Radcliff being one that comes to mind.

I've run into a few real estate people that don't like it and at least one non photographer that's not in real estate that doesn't like it.

I have some creative (or my attempt to be creative) photos that I display on my walls and have in a portfolio book in my living room. When people pick a favorite, without my discussing types of photography, they most often pick one of the HDRs.

When I first started doing HDR, mostly for real estate, I had some flyers done without it and some done with it. While not scientifically measured, I observed prospects eyes spending more time on flyers with HDR. Two agents I work with actually counted hits on Loopnet and MLS. The HDR shots generated more than double the hits.

There are always exceptions, but generally speaking, civilians love it, and photographers hate it.

True Scotsman, anyone?

Regards, Mike

 

[Graham Meale]

Why complicate things? Three's plenty. I've recently been in conversation with someone who assures me that he can get better results from Photomatix by feeding it two images rather than three.

 

[David Pavlich]

I know you don't want to complicate things, but the best way to do this is with a tripod and a remote release or use the timer.

I set up, set the camera on Aperture Priority, f8, ISO100 and take a test shot. Check what the camera chose as the proper shutter speed and remember it.

Now, set your camera on Manual, ISO100, f8, and for the sake of this discussion, the camera chose 1/60 as the proper shutter speed. Use that as your middle exposure.

Now, start at 1/40, 1/50, 1/60, 1/80, and 1/100. Take these into Light Room, take one of the shots and do a lens correction only. Now highlight them all and Sync them.

Now take the shots into your favorite HDR program. I use Photomatix 6. It has a lot of options. For natural shots, I like the Real Estate option for most. There is no hint of tone mapping so many associate with HDR. This works well with, d'uh, real estate shooting.

This is St. Louis Cathedral in New Orleans. This is actually 7 shots blended in Photomatix Pro 5.




I've posted this here before and each time, there is some sort of artifact around the spires. I've printed this at 16X24 and no such artifact shows up.

And here's one just to make your eyes bleed.





David

--
"The world doesn't need you...." Gene Simmons
Viewbug: https://www.viewbug.com/member/David_Pavlich

 

[Clark666]

Thank you This seems to be the best recommendation for me to try. It is close to what I tried without the tripod The tripod allows me to carefully set the exposure times and not move the camera and change the scene. Unless there is a wind or breeze that changes the scene the slow speeds are good. But I will need to change the aperture to allow faster speeds if there is motion.

 

[Ed Rizk]

Thank you This seems to be the best recommendation for me to try. It is close to what I tried without the tripod The tripod allows me to carefully set the exposure times and not move the camera and change the scene.

It also allows you to chimp then add more exposures as needed.

Unless there is a wind or breeze that changes the scene the slow speeds are good. But I will need to change the aperture to allow faster speeds if there is motion.