those are all great pictures but what is this a pic of?! they building a bridge or dam or something?!
Thanks, and yes. That's the new Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge, still under construction. In that photo, the main supporting arch had been just completed after several years of construction. Welders are up there connecting rebar, and that's a trail of welding spark falling into the Colorado River. Total luck that I caught this shot. I was driving on the dam on my way home from Vegas, admiring the view as always, then saw the welding sparks and knew I had to stop. Made a lot of money from that shot.
Here's a couple more.
Amazing feat of engineering, this bypass. HDR is really good for this sort of thing too.
2005 Rubicon, Currie JJ SA lift with AEV 3" springs. Link to my build
"Confidence is that feeling you have before you fully understand the situation."
Just wondering if everybody gets what an hdr picture is? YOU CAN NOT MAKE AN HDR BY PLAYING IN PHOTOSHOP. Now with that said an hdr picture is a group of several pictures taken with different exposures combined to create a picture with an almost surreal look of all the elements in the picture. Examples.......................................... .................................................. ............................................
Picture I did in photoshop. kinda looks like an hdr but IT"S NOT. Just messed with alot
photoshoped HDR FAKE
The pictures used to make the HDR
I hope this will shead a bit of light on what and HDR is and how its made. Note my pictures have a photomatix water mark on them it's because i have the FREE version you can download off the net. So now you've seen how its done go download the program take a few different exposures with your camera and make your very own.
"hdr" is not the correct term here, for what most people are calling these images.
What yall are doing is "tone mapping", or some other sort of similar effect of brightening shadows and darkening highlights with a soft blend radius. Maybe you start out with a multi-exposure HDR (a "real hdr"), maybe you start out with a single exposure. But regardless, the effect yall are doing is "tone mapping" the image, and the ringing and odd contrast and saturations is from the tone mapping, not the multi-exposure aspect of the original image. The purpose of an HDR image holds values brighter (and/or darker) than your screen or print can display (brighter than 255 white, and darker than 0 black), with a higher bit depth, more "latitude". Tone mapping makes the dark areas brighter, and the bright areas darker so that it all fits into the color scale of your print or your monitor. The odd ringing and saturation present is just from the algorithm used to compress the values.
If all you want is the tone mapped effect (ringing around shadows and highlights, and odd contrast/saturation), there's usually no need to start out with a multi-exposure HDR, unless you are in a high contrast situation (like shooting a dark car with a sunset behind the car) where you loose shadow and highlight detail completely in one or more channels. (or possibly if your camera gets really noisy in shadow areas that are going to be brought up by the tone mapping. that might be another reason to do multi-exposure) But if you get a good proper single exposure, having a brighter and darker exposure is not going to gain you much latitude/range in your image, since you already have good highlight and shadow detail in your single exposure.
So calling any of these images "real hdr" or "fake hdr" is a moot point, it doesn't matter. None of them are HDR. Some of them may have started out as a "real" multi-exposure HDR. But in my opinion, multi-exposure or single exposure, it doesn't matter. In my opinion, tone mapping either of them usually looks silly when taken to the extreme that most people seem to do I much rather see an image with a good exposure, and if highlights are to bright and shadows are to dark all in one image, there are more elegant ways to control the contrast than with the harsh tonemapping that everyone seems to love for some reason
Daniel Buck - [URL="http://www.danielbuck.net"]www.DanielBuck.net[/URL] - [URL="http://www.dnsfail.com"]www.DNSFAIL.com[/URL]
Last edited by danielbuck; 07-17-2010 at 03:06 AM..
hey I did my last one using 5 images of different exposures, and had to edit some things via Photomatix after it tried merging to HDR, cuz it does a ****ty job at it, sorry.... So does Photoshop at making HDRs. But lets not forget photos are an art. To each his own. No need to jump on everyone and complain. I agree an image only edited in Psd is not an HDR, and it must consist of 3 or more images of different exposures blended together, isnt that what MOST people here are doing with Photomatix? Do we need to be professional photographers to post in this thread? I guess I'll stop screwing everything up.......
Seriously though, its not easy to do and I suck at it..... Im still learning...... but I hate when people have to jump on everyone because its not perfect..... That is all.
Originally Posted by melk:
"Either more or less lube may change the moaning!"