 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| ||||||||
 |
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
| 
| User list | Rules | You are not logged in.
Hi leif
When using Photomatix to do the HDR images, you should always work with 16 bit TIF.
Did you do it so ?
With the Enhancer, don't use to much detail contrast. This will result in artifacts in the sky.
In this case, I can see the advantage of the pole 
Offline
lumelix wrote:
Hi leif
When using Photomatix to do the HDR images, you should always work with 16 bit TIF.
Did you do it so ?
With the Enhancer, don't use to much detail contrast. This will result in artifacts in the sky.
In this case, I can see the advantage of the pole
I have tried DXO smart ligtning and Photomatix at 16bit TIFFs
Conclusion: it can't be used for clear blue skies
For now it looks like the best solution, next to HDR, is to care for the highlights (exposure compensation) and use the shadows tool in PS to the max
Leif
Offline
Hi Leif
Yes! You can win a lot of dynamic in the shadows. But if the lights are burned out, you can do nothing.
Interestingly, I have no problems with the sky in Photomatix when I work with TIFFs and 16bit as input.
But it's important that you first create the HDRs from every single image, and then stitch them together.
Otherwise, Photomatix reinforces all the blending errors (vignetting, different exposure etc.).
You should use the same settings for all images, e.g. with a batch job.
Offline
lumelix wrote:
exposure etc.).
You should use the same settings for all images, e.g. with a batch job.
I did run "batch single images" in Photomatix. So all of the 91 TIFF images (16 bit) should process with the same parameters (?)
Leif
Offline
lumelix wrote:
Yes! You can win a lot of dynamic in the shadows. But if the lights are burned out, you can do nothing.
Make two versions of the image:
one for the sky and one for the ground. The sky-image is too dark on the ground, the ground-image is too bright in the sky.
Put each on it´s own layer in Photoshop and blend them by erasing the sky resp. the ground keeping some density from each.
Of course: once the sky is washed out nothing can save it - but maybe you can clone parts of the sky and add them using only
5 or 10% density.
best, Klaus
Online
Hi
The methode Klaus described above is an other good possibility in this case.
The problem with the sky is typically, when stitching first and then doing the HDR-job
in Photomatix with the whole panorama.
The detail enhancer amplifies all normally not visible errors like vignetting or small differences in image exposure.
To avoid this, it's better to make first the HDR from single images and then stitch them together.
To correct first the vignetting is also a good idea.
Offline
lumelix wrote:
To avoid this, it's better to make first the HDR from single images and then stitch them together.
that's what I did: DXO->TIFF, Photomatix batch single images, APG stitch
lumelix wrote:
To correct first the vignetting is also a good idea.
vignetting was removed by DXO, which use calibrated modules for the camera and the lens
Stitching the TIFFs from DXO gives me perfect sky. No problem at all.
The problem is the snow on the mountains opposite to the sun. The sunlit snow is washed out, and what isn't there can't be brought back.
The challenge is to darken the snow without making the foreground black.
The image below illustrates the challenge. I guess it is as good as it gets.
http://www.rundskuer.no/panotour/leknes … ltour.html
I'll do HDR next time. (It was 15 below zero so it was not a option to do R&D on the scene)
Leif
Last edited by leifs (2013-01-16 15:22:36)
Offline