Oregon Coast 2, HDR

Cruising the coastline, done a number of bracketing experiments this time in hope of getting some really nice HDRs. Just downloading PhotoMatrix but haven't bought it yet so can't post the tone-mapped version, but here's one diced together w/o tone mapping.

I'm a little disappointed that I can't spend longer up here... the opportunities are incredible. I think one would need a few weeks (at least)

GB, you can post the hdr one. They'll just have their logo on the pic but its not super intrusive. Oregon coast is a photographer's nightmare. There isn't any place not to shoot.

You caught a good scene here even without hdr. I like the silhouette of the rocks.

just a little left of the left rock there appears to be what may be sensor dust in the cloud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frog

GB, you can post the hdr one. They'll just have their logo on the pic but its not super intrusive. Oregon coast is a photographer's nightmare. There isn't any place not to shoot.

You caught a good scene here even without hdr. I like the silhouette of the rocks.

just a little left of the left rock there appears to be what may be sensor dust in the cloud.

---

thanks Frog. This is actually the HDR I think, just not "tone mapped." yes, that little blip is odd, will habe to take a close look at the other shots to see if it's in the same position in the frame. I think it should be removed regardless.

One thing I was wondering about was how the water at five different places in the five shots would affect the merged HDR. Not bad here I think ...

Nightmare btw ? :D

Thats one nightmare I would like to have! I really like the look of the water in this! Cant wait to see more :D

I agree with everyoneelse the smug to the left of the big rick needs to go. Other than than an excellent effort, and IMHO the subtle way HDR should be used.

Thanks Lori and Bill! I will work on that smudge or whatever the heck it is. Bill you are right, it is a very subtle HDR.. I guess can be good depending on what one wants to achieve.

G

As a non ton-mapped image is it good. Too much highlights blown on the left I think. I would like to see the HDR version/

Hmm. I just tried CS2's HDR function: what do you think? I think PhotoMatrix's is sharper. CS2's is a bit dull but this may be due to the full tone mapping that I didn't get with PM's freebie version. I also cleaned up that dust mark that Frog caught.

Btw - not sure why there's such a disparity in color between the original post and this one. I may have played with the original version more than I should have. I don't recall it quite being that colorful ..

The softer water minus the golds makes this one appear more peaceful. The first one is more dramatic. Personally, I like the first one best.

If you had detail in the rocks I would give it an A+. Did you use an ND grad as well?

GB - Well I thought I was done seeing your series, then this thread found its way in! Again, great capture! The original does look a bit too saturated, the blue looks borderline surreal (which may be a good effect if thats what you're going for). I definitely like the color in both your original and second post, and can't pick a preference. This sort of shot really lends itself well to many color effects. The second one looks cleaner to me, the grain is smoother. In the original the light on the left is a little too hot and a bit distracting, but the subtlety of the sky in the second makes that distraction go away for me.

I finally realized the difference - the first post was PhotoMatrix's but w/o tone mapping. I guess this means it just combines the images and doesn't do any fancy slicing and dicing. Somehow that produced the wild colors. The second is CS2's.

Anbesol, Paula - I think the first post's colors are fine until you see the 2nd, then realizing that the first's are .. umm, nuts? Viewing both, it's really hard to see how they could be the same image. So much for that paradox.

Greg, I don't believe I used a grad ND on this one, though I did use one on other shots.

Here's the problem/question: contrast creates powerful, eye-catching images, but also causes loss of detail in bright or dark areas, esp in digital shots with cameras that aren't cutting edge (my D200 is already ~ 3 years old on the market). The HDR is supposed to help out with this. Additionally, one of the discriminators for lens quality is contrast, which is considered good (poorer lens have low contrast and dull images).

So which is good, high or low contrast? Would not a grad ND filter even out the exposure in top and bottom, reducing contrast? Is that good or bad, considering the above? I believe the answer is a matter of degree, and also depends on the subject, location, etc. Maybe a good thesis topic for grad school :D

:eek: Sometimes y'all sound like Charlie Brown's teacher to me :p
What I do know is I like the first one best, it just grabs me and demands attention (well it got mine anyway :D )

I'd like to see you tone map the first one. I've had worse results without the tone mapping and after playing with sliders, they come out good. The first one I did, I thought photomatix was awful when I saw the results without tone mapping.
Yes if you post it it will say photomatix here and there but we'll know what to look for.

When I saw the first picture I thought a gradient ND filter would be useful to tone down the bright spot in the upper left part of the sky. I like the second picture, it seems more natural. Although it did lose the blue in the sky.

The original one posted looks a too harsh and contrasty and too much saturation. The second one looks very tranquil and still grabs my attention because of the stark slihouettes.
I like the photo a lot with the mild processing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lori11

:eek: Sometimes y'all sound like Charlie Brown's teacher to me :p
What I do know is I like the first one best, it just grabs me and demands attention (well it got mine anyway :D )

---

LOL - I am so with ya!

Ok Frog, I went ahead and did the PM tone mapping. Since I had played with CS2's version a bit, adjusting contrast, etc, I needed to do the same to PM's to keep all things equal. Probably a little less difference than you would expect (what I expected, anyway).

Jim, darn, you're right about that blue. Now I miss it :D

Thanks Gary... The first looked OK until I posted the second. It does seem too intense by comparison (!)

Paula, Lori, we're just geeking out here. :)

G

Ps - I did darken it a little after I generated the HDR. This made it more as it was when I was there.