You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 8137304 (Thread)

# Constructive feedback:
This is a particularly poor subject for HDRI since there's such a low dynamic range in this environment to begin with.
HDRI is most effective (and was developed for) environments where there's a particularly wide dynamic range which is impossible to capture in a single shot.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Trencin_hdr_001.jpg
(I helped save b3ta! mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:17, archived)
# HDRIS
(I helped save b3ta! emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:18, archived)
# Hahahaha
(I helped save b3ta! Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:20, archived)
#
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDRI
(I helped save b3ta! mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:20, archived)
# bully
(I helped save b3ta! mongychops, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:19, archived)
# NO U
(I helped save b3ta! mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:23, archived)
# Quite the contrast !
(I helped save b3ta! Valin I changed glasses while I wasn't looking, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:19, archived)
# thanks i'll try it again on a different piccy
i think thats the first time i've ever got constructive feedback on here, mostly its abuse, surrealness and CDCs
(gobbledegook blurs the line between lurking and stalking, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:22, archived)
# No problem
but reading your comment here I don't think I've understood what it is you're doing.
My understanding of HDRI is that it's constructed of multiple shots of the same scene taken with different exposures and then combined. From your comment above, I don't think that's what you're doing here?
(I helped save b3ta! mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:25, archived)
# 100% Correctedness
(I helped save b3ta! Art101 You all have an unhealthy and morbid fascination, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:29, archived)
# no i'm just playing
i figured i could get the same effect by using one pic then altering the exposure in the raw file processor to get three separate images with different exposures, then combining the images. will this not have the same effect as three separate images taken in camera?
i was being lazy, that might be the problem.
(gobbledegook blurs the line between lurking and stalking, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 19:02, archived)
# That's perfectly okay for HDR
It's just not as good as several images. Especially if your camera doesn't have a particularly broad sensitivity.

The purists go for several images over quite a wide range of exposures.

(I helped save b3ta! foop, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 19:11, archived)
# okay
i'll do it properly next time and post results here for all to see
(gobbledegook blurs the line between lurking and stalking, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 19:18, archived)
# It seems like that should work
but it won't produce the same results, because whatever exposure you choose in the raw settings for a single shot cannot reveal details which were not within the exposure range of that shot. The idea of multiple-exposure shots is that you can comfortably extend the range beyond the exposure capabilities of a single shot. It really does work and is well worth the trouble. Choice of subject is really important though. Choose something with a very wide dynamic range to begin with.
There are lots of tutorials online, some of which are excellent.
(I helped save b3ta! mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 19:28, archived)
# thanks
b3ta.com/board/8137474
(gobbledegook blurs the line between lurking and stalking, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 19:41, archived)
# ur doin it wrong etc.
You need to take multiple shots with different exposures - you have a D70 so you can do that fine. You'd want a picture with a high enough exposure to get the details on the buildings for it to be a good looking photo though.
(DaveW, Wed 5 Mar 2008, 18:36, archived)