dswiger wrote:
I think we need a new term for increasing dynamic range since HDR has become profanity to some
How about MDR for More Dynamic Range, or IDR for Increased Dynamic Range?
That way the pious can say, "I don't use HDR, but instead use MDR" when the using the more sacred blending techniques
For Jim, so he does'nt have to promote the D800, he can say, "I used IDR" and folks will know what "that" means
dswiger wrote:
I think we need a new term for increasing dynamic range since HDR has become profanity to some
How about MDR for More Dynamic Range, or IDR for Increased Dynamic Range?
That way the pious can say, "I don't use HDR, but instead use MDR" when the using the more sacred blending techniques
For Jim, so he does'nt have to promote the D800, he can say, "I used IDR" and folks will know what "that" means
Just trying to be helpful
Dan
I propose adding a term, "Slightly Expanded Dynamic Range," or SEDR. Since it is sometimes only increased in portions of the image, we also need, "Partial Expanded Dynamic Range," or PEDR. Since this could be done either automatically ("Automated Slightly Expanded Dynamic Range" - ASEDR - and "Automatic Partial Expanded Dynamic Range" - APEDR) or manually "Manual Slightly Expanded Dynamic Range" - MSEDR- and "Manual Partial Expanded Dynamic Range" - MPEDR), we'll need special terms for these possibilities, too. Recognizing that managing dynamic range can sometimes require narrowing the range using curves or contrast controls, either globally or locally, we'll also need some variations along the lines of "Curve Based Localized Decrease in Dynamic Range," or CBLDIDR -of course including both automatic and manual approaches: ACBLDIDR and MCBLDEDR.
I think I'll head back to my photography computer and see if it will be effective to create a MCBSELDIDR or whether perhaps the CPECBLDIDR approach will work better.
Other Dan
Jul 17, 2012 at 11:00 AM
Mark Metternich Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
gdanmitchell wrote:
I propose adding a term, "Slightly Expanded Dynamic Range," or SEDR. Since it is sometimes only increased in portions of the image, we also need, "Partial Expanded Dynamic Range," or PEDR. Since this could be done either automatically ("Automated Slightly Expanded Dynamic Range" - ASEDR - and "Automatic Partial Expanded Dynamic Range" - APEDR) or manually "Manual Slightly Expanded Dynamic Range" - MSEDR- and "Manual Partial Expanded Dynamic Range" - MPEDR), we'll need special terms for these possibilities, too. Recognizing that managing dynamic range can sometimes require narrowing the range using curves or contrast controls, either globally or locally, we'll also need some variations along the lines of "Curve Based Localized Decrease in Dynamic Range," or CBLDIDR -of course including both automatic and manual approaches: ACBLDIDR and MCBLDEDR.
I think I'll head back to my photography computer and see if it will be effective to create a MCBSELDIDR or whether perhaps the CPECBLDIDR approach will work better.
Hmmmm.... I am thinking that this is one of those "Creative Outlays of Opinions Laid" - COOL posts that makes one "Pontificate Openly Near Dynamic Extraodinary Reasoning In Neandroltholic Glee" - PONDERING why this even needs to be "Debated Internally So Cautious Users Sit Still Empatically Debilitated" - DISCUSSED any more.
I just cut my ND grads with a pair of scissors to fit each scene. Expensive, but much easier than hand-blending.
Not sure if anyone realizes this or not, but ND hard grads (at least Lee's) can usually cover the whole frame if you move it down far enough, thus doubling as a grad and solid in one filter.
Also, when dealing with heavy water spray, you can pull all of the ND section out of the frame and leave it clear for 2-3 filters in the holder. As they get wet, just pull one off the holder for each shot so there isn't a delay in capturing several frames.
There are uses for everything, but I guess that's just me being the inventor/engineer minded person I am.
Johan_E wrote:
I just cut my ND grads with a pair of scissors to fit each scene. Expensive, but much easier than hand-blending.
Not sure if anyone realizes this or not, but ND hard grads (at least Lee's) can usually cover the whole frame if you move it down far enough, thus doubling as a grad and solid in one filter.
Also, when dealing with heavy water spray, you can pull all of the ND section out of the frame and leave it clear for 2-3 filters in the holder. As they get wet, just pull one off the holder for each shot so there isn't a delay in capturing several frames.
There are uses for everything, but I guess that's just me being the inventor/engineer minded person I am. ...Show more →
Ha. ha.... yeah, cutting the grads!
That is true, they could be used for wet situations... I will have to remember that one.
Dan Mitchell said - "The exposure blending method allows boundaries between the light/dark areas that are not straight lines. A favorite example of mine involves shooting out of the entrance of a steep and narrow desert canyon into the open desert beyond. The v-shaped canyon walls were in deep shadow, but I wanted to retain some detail in this dark area. However, the correct exposure for these shadows resulted in a badly blown out desert in the distance. I was able to exposure blend in a v-shape, which would have been next to impossible with filters."
That's the problen with NDG filters - great for seascapes but irregular horizons especially valleys are impossible
Niall
On my recent trip to Yosemite, I posted a picture of the sunrise pano of glacier point. I used all multi exposure digital blending. I had originally planned to use filters, but it would have been hard since half dome protrudes out more than any other geologic feature in shot so i would have ended up with a very dark half dome just to get a good exposure of the sun rise. in fact my entire trip through Yosemite I hardly broke out the filter kit.
Good point.
I'm sure it's already been covered, but GND, even RGND filters only work well when the scene gives you a clean horizon/tree/mountain line.
If the the hills form a "V" you end up darkening the wrong stuff.
I had hoped some filter MFG would have made two sets of V GND filters, maybe 30 deg & 45 deg.
Heck, even a "spot" GND series with 2 or 3 different spot sizes.
I end up doing layer masks & blending multiple times to solve this in Photoshop.
This is a two shot blend using layer masks in cs5....i tried using enfuse to auto blend and tonemap but it looked really bad. This is as close to natural and what I saw as i could get. I know the buildings need work and I think traffic going by (shaking the bridge) made my shots less than sharp.
two shot blend using enfuse in LR
commentary welcome
btw is there any reason to go beyond f11 using a zeiss 21?
mike reid wrote:
This is a two shot blend using layer masks in cs5....i tried using enfuse to auto blend and tonemap but it looked really bad. This is as close to natural and what I saw as i could get. I know the buildings need work and I think traffic going by (shaking the bridge) made my shots less than sharp.
btw is there any reason to go beyond f11 using a zeiss 21?
I like your 2nd version better. The first has all the contrast ( snap ) removed. I've noticed this problem on many different blended images. Our persute at times to extend the dynamic range leaves the image void blacks and bright areas, leaving it flat.
As far as going beyond f11 with the Zeisse 21, many times when I want to include close up features in the image and still keep the far background sharp.
I just started using the zeiss 21 just for this trip. I experimented all my landscape shots from F11 and F16. It could be the conditions and lighting I was working with, but I hardly noticed too much of a difference of F11 to F16. i used F11 to keep the shutter speed up to not blur too much stuff without having to ISO up. You might want to pop by the alternate lens forum. There are a ton of zeiss shooters over there and i'm sure there can share more knowledge on this.
On the subject of HDR, I have found that if I use the D800 at 100 ISO, I seldom have to use a gnd filter or blend images; because the shadows are so clean at that ISO, the information in the shadows can be revealed via ACR and PS6.
