I asked a question in a thread in the "City,Still life, Abstract" forums here at FM. It was in a topic entitled "My First Attempt at HDR" posted by rustinm. He has some beautiful interior shots of the National Cathedral in Wash. D.C. He mentioned that he processed his shots in "Photomatrix", and then in PS.
I have never done any HDR's, but I really want to get into that. I have CS3, and I know that I can open a series of bracketed exposures in CS3 and click on "merge to HDR". My question is what can be accomplished by doing what rustinm did, as opposed to if he just opened his exposures in CS3.
Does Photomatrix make it easier, does it cut down on the work involved, or is there a difference in the final image? I asked this yesterday in that thread, but so far there are no responses. Thanks.
well i am no expert at either, but in my experience, i have found that photomatix (not photomatrix) gives a more abstract look than photoshop (i use cs2). it also flies on auto pilot a lot easier than cs2. i use both of them for different different effects. when it comes down to it i think i like photomatix a little better.
i found this tutorial to be very helpful with hdr in photoshop
JDeV, you pose a very legitimate question. I got Photomatix prior to CS3 and liked using it better than CS2 for merging. That said, I have to admit that since I got CS3, I hardly ever use Photomatix any more. Imho, the combination of the improved CS3 merge and the other adjustment abilities such as shadow/highlight have pretty much made my need for Photomatix go away. Hope that opinion is helpful to you. Best wishes, -Art
Art B wrote:
JDeV, you pose a very legitimate question. I got Photomatix prior to CS3 and liked using it better than CS2 for merging. That said, I have to admit that since I got CS3, I hardly ever use Photomatix any more. Imho, the combination of the improved CS3 merge and the other adjustment abilities such as shadow/highlight have pretty much made my need for Photomatix go away. Hope that opinion is helpful to you. Best wishes, -Art
Art, very helpful. Now let me ask you this one. This may be an unfair question, since you can't see the originals. Do you think rustinm could have gotten the same results that he's showing in the post that I referred to above, using just CS3?
JDeV wrote:
... This may be an unfair question, since you can't see the originals. Do you think rustinm could have gotten the same results that he's showing in the post that I referred to above, using just CS3?
Jon, the simple answer to your question is, imho, yes.
As you may be aware there are often multiple ways to achieve an effect in ps. Additionally, many - if not most - actions, filters and plug-ins perform image manipulations that can be either simulated or directly duplicated in ps, if only the user knew the recipe. But since we generally don't know that recipe, use of these add-ins can be most helpful to all of us that may not have the time or desire to develop a sufficiently large bag of tricks to get some of the more sophisticated tasks done. In a sense, "its all good, just a question of where and how you wish to spend your time and/or money."
JDeV wrote:
Art, very helpful. Now let me ask you this one. This may be an unfair question, since you can't see the originals. Do you think rustinm could have gotten the same results that he's showing in the post that I referred to above, using just CS3?
Jon
Yes, he could've gotten the same effect using just CS3; however, it's much simpler and faster using Photomatix. Photomatix automates the process.
Bill Gass wrote:
Good reading here and on the web but still tuff to figure out without watching it done or having someone help/show you.
There is some killer HDR / Photomatix work out there for sure. I think the picture, and picture content helps an HDR picture sometimes more than others. For example church or brick pictures. ( in my opinion )
Here is a picture I did in PS7 and used Photomatix. I have CS3 at home and would like to get some sort of a rendering/Photomatix/HDR program but not sure what to get for now.
Cheers.
~Bill~
Bill, I'm a member of NAPP, and frequent their forums. I asked about HDR and was told all about how CS3 was an improvement over CS2 etc. I then asked about Photomatix, and the mod who was telling me about HDR in CS3 said he actually uses Photomatix, but he wanted me to be aware that I could do HDR in CS3, he then recommended Photomatix. I then saw a tutorial by Matt Klozkowski, one of the NAPP gurus. He mentioned how he never was happy with his HDR, but someone had told him to try Photomatix. He tried the trial version with a bunch of bracketed shots he had, and was sold. He recommended it, and at that point I bought it. I figure if the PS gurus like it, it's good enough for me. Also I bought a book called "Complete Guide to High Dynamic Range Digital Photography" by Ferrell McCollough that I'm reading now. It's very easy to understand, and he compares all the different software HDR programs.
Bill Gass wrote:
Well thats good to know that I can download a version for CS3. How much did you pay for it and who did you get it from ? How is it working for you ?
I got it directly from www.hdrsoft.com. I went with the $99 version. If you join Napp(which I highly recommend) you get discounts on everything from insurance, hotel rooms, and a lot of software, including this.
HDR is coming on fast with a lot of people. I predict that in the future it will be an option choice on the camera and will automatically bracket for you. Actually, 5 images works better than three.
Bill Gass wrote:
Do jpegs work well or do you need to use raw images ? My 20D didn't came with a rew converter that I know of.
~Bill~
Bill, in the book I mentioned above, the author says that jpegs work every bit as well as raw when it comes to HDR. He gives an example of a beautiful image of Bryce Canyon shot in jpeg.
