PICTARS! Arches National Park, One Update

UpgradeFailure

Golden Member
Feb 29, 2004
1,672
0
0
I love seeing the blended ones..can you show the 5 images of picture 4/6? I'd like to see them all on their own :) Great pics, as usual.
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
The advantage of doing the HDR blend is that it increases dynamic range in the photo:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm

In a shot where there is a really wiiiide range of brightness (ie. the bright setting sun + shadows and less-lit areas), the camera has trouble recording this range.

So if it tries to record the details in the highlights, there ends up being no detail in the shadows (they turn to black).

If it tries to record the details in the shadows, there ends up being no detail in the highlights (they turn to white).

If it tries to record the details somewhere in the middle, you lose BOTH shadow and highlight detail.

HDR blending is basically taking multiple pictures at different exposures and then blending them together to make a single picture that has more dynamic range than the camera can take in a single picture.

Just for example:

The entire dynamic/brightness range of the scene is this:

|----------------------------total range----------------------------|

These are the ranges that your camera takes:

Picture One (EV -1, underexposed by one stop)

|----range A----|

Picture Two (EV 0, "properly exposed" according to your camera)

..................|----range B-----|

Picture Three (EV +1, overexposed by one stop)

......................................|----range C----|

In HDR software you then blend all these together so you get a picture with range A + range B + range C

|----------------HDR range-----------------|

Note that this range is wider than the range of any single picture the camera can take. Also note that this range is still shorter than the total range of the actual scene. To make your HDR range even wider, you can add more pictures at different exposures (ex. -2, -1, 0, +1, +2 OR -3, -2, -1, 0, +1)
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
Panoramas

For my sunset pano I used 1/125s, f/10, and a 180mm lens turned to portrait orientation.

Steps

Say that you want to take a picture of a scene that's physically like this, from left to right:

---dark (mountains)---------------middle (plains)---------------bright (sunrise)---

Pitfall

Many people will meter these areas seperately. (ie. constant f/8, the dark part is shot at 1/50s, the middle part is shot at 1/100s, and the bright part is shot at 1/200s) Do not do this, because the resulting three pictures will all have different exposures, and thus different colors and brightnesses, meaning when you go to try and stitch these together, you're trying to stitch together three pictures with different colors and brightnesses, and you'll see seams in the form of color differences, etc. Overall yucky.

What to Do (generally)

1. Eyeball the scene, and find the area of average brightness. In this case it's the plains.

2. Meter for the area of average brightness, and say the settings are f/8, 1/100s.

3. Switch to manual if you haven't already done so and lock in f/8 and 1/100s.

4. Shoot each section of the panorama at f/8 and 1/100s.

5. The resulting pictures should all have the same color and brightness levels, or very close.

6. Use Hugin to stitch the photos together. Use Enblend (bundled with Hugin IIRC) to do some fine tuning of the color and brightness levels to eliminate seams.

7. .....

8. Realise that you're poor because you spent stuff on camera gear :(
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
Originally posted by: UpgradeFailure
I love seeing the blended ones..can you show the 5 images of picture 4/6? I'd like to see them all on their own :) Great pics, as usual.

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/photos/112094488-L.jpg

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/photos/112094572-L.jpg

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/photos/112094626-L.jpg

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/photos/112094677-L.jpg

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/photos/112094419-L.jpg


Originally posted by: tfinch2
Let's see the unedited ones too.

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/photos/112095415-L.jpg

Pano Unedited ( oh screw it I'll link the whole gallery :p )

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/gallery/1454677/2/112095415
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
My boss told me to go there, but I forgot to. Did you go to Zion too?

Nope, I didn't make it to Zion. My trip was a dash across the continent, from Ohio to Colorado, hitting up the Rockies, Arches, Canyonlands, Great Sand Dunes, and back to Ohio in 10 days by car. I made it to Colorado in a day (22 hours of driving).
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
Originally posted by: DaWhim
Originally posted by: Aharami
Originally posted by: DaWhim
I thought you mean arcadia national park. :p

nice picture

hmm. do you mean acadia national park?

oops, yes.

I need to go to Acadia sometimes. Methinks this coming Spring Break I'll take a run towards the east coast, up towards Maine. Mmmmmmm... lobster.... if I'm not careful I'll come back with no pictures but a full tummy :p
 

Aharami

Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
21,205
165
106
just went to acadia this aug and took like 800 pics. my pics wont do the place justice. such a beautiful place
 

xtknight

Elite Member
Oct 15, 2004
12,974
0
71
The output picture (4/6) is a little on the orange side, probably due to the low gamma of the low exposure images. Maybe you can mess with the HDR combining options some more. Cool concept though. Good HDR is hard to do (I certainly haven't had much success).
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
One new picture added!

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/photos/112302490-L.jpg

Original

Originally posted by: xtknight
The output picture (4/6) is a little on the orange side, probably due to the low gamma of the low exposure images. Maybe you can mess with the HDR combining options some more. Cool concept though. Good HDR is hard to do (I certainly haven't had much success).

I agree, although Delicate Arch really *was* very orange in real life. My HDR software is weird though. When the HDR image is viewed in the HDR software, it looks fine. When it is saved as TIFF and then opened in Photoshop, it gets really orange :confused:

The color spaces haven't changed either... the original is in Adobe RGB and Photoshop is set to work in Abode RGB...
 

FilmCamera

Senior member
Nov 12, 2006
959
1
0
You do know that Adobe RGB images viewed on the web will not look right. They need to be in sRGB because web browsers don't display Adobe RGB. Don't know if that's part of your issue but anyway.

I need to get out to Arches. I'm not that far away from it.
 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
Originally posted by: FilmCamera
You do know that Adobe RGB images viewed on the web will not look right. They need to be in sRGB because web browsers don't display Adobe RGB. Don't know if that's part of your issue but anyway.

I need to get out to Arches. I'm not that far away from it.

Yuppers. I shoot in Adobe RGB, convert my RAWs to TIFF in Adobe RGB, work in Photoshop in Adobe RGB, save my final TIFF in Adobe RGB, then as a final step convert the picture to sRGB and JPG for web viewing.

I'm confused on the color difference between PS and my HDR software because both of them are in Adobe RGB... yet they're different colors...
 

xtknight

Elite Member
Oct 15, 2004
12,974
0
71
Are you using Photoshop to combine the HDRs?

Edit: combine the images into an HDR rather*

I messed around with your 5 source images a bit. I couldn't get it that great either. Either it was pretty dark or the sun's rays didn't fill the screen like they should. I think the images need to be taken farther apart in terms of exposure (really dark, normal, really bright). Either that or we're not combining them properly.