LightningPaul | photoblog » Two Towers

15 Oct 2008 • 355 views

Two Towers - HDRi Thoughts (2 of 3)

The exactly same two industrial towers of yesterday.

TECH-INFO: this is the continuation of yesterdays explanation and demonstration of some personal thoughts and experiences about HDRi or High Dynamic Range Imaging.

For this image, coming from the same 32 bit HDR file as the one of yesterday, I used the details enhancer of Photomatrix. The name says it all: to bring out all the structures, textures and other details which are present in the 32 bit HDR image. If you look at the sky and the towers you see an enormous amount of details and tonal variations. Especially when comparing with the image of yesterday. If you can, please open two browser windows, or switch between tabs, so you can easily see the differences between them.

I prefer this view because it's much closer to the real experience. If you watch the bright sky your eyes see the shapes of the clouds. When your eyes turn to the much darker towers the pupils open widely to accept much more light (it's like opening the aperture). So in real you actually scan the whole scene while adjusting for a huge variety of light levels. Finally your brain composes all the little seen pieces and constructs an image in your head. Which is what you think you are seeing.
I admit that I made the details of this image a little bit stronger than in reality to create the same wow factor as I had. After all, you mostly have to amplify to the subject and strong points in an image anyway.

After doing the detail enhancement I boosted the contrast a bit to make the image more punchy.

UPDATE: submitted on Vazaar for the topic Beautiful Industrial.

camera	NIKON D200
exposure mode
shutterspeed
aperture	f/11.0
sensitivity	ISO100
focal length	12.0mm
resolution	3872x2592 pixels

Two Towers - HDRi Thoughts (2 of 3)

comments (9)

John Maslowski

United States

15 Oct 2008, 12:26

Definitely prefer this image. Actually, this image appears more realistic and captivating. The other one is flat and non-appealing. That's just my personal opinion. Notice the symmetry and composition better here, outstanding work.

LightningPaul: I'm very glad you think the same. What I want to tell is that HDR software can be very useful or necessary, even if the dynamic range of digital cameras gets (much) bigger.

DrAW!

the states

15 Oct 2008, 13:35

no it's not more 'realistic' (what a relative word) but i prefer it cos i prefer fantasy to boring reality any day !

the purists not in favor of hdri processing will by now be getting ready to boo your series...too bad for them.

i prefer this to yesterdays cos it's not what you see everyday (though at the rate we're going with hdri that may change

). this is more dramatic and artistic.

as per yesterday's discussion, hdri purists believe that the only way to make an hdri is to composite more than one still image and thus if they see a pic of a bird flying in the air they say it's not hdri.
i want to believe that the technology will keep improving as more and more people get interested, and that it will get easier and easier to produce.
remember that what your eye does in the 'real experience' (relative again) is fully automatic

LightningPaul: I see two sides of HDR:
a/ a technical solution for overcoming the limited range of cameras (so just making multiple shots in combine them into one HDR file)
b/ a creative way to present an image

The first one is probably a matter of time to be solved, so over time mostly one picture must be taken. The latter one is more important to me. I use tone mapping to bring out details and textures. I even use from time to time on single JPG files with great and (sometimes) low noise results.

Many thanks for your comments, I really appreciate them.

alex

Germany

15 Oct 2008, 16:25

I actually like both. The second one does look a bit artificial though (small halos on the tower's side, dramatic look inside the clouds). The first picture misses the clear blue sky and some details, i'd vote for something in between.

LightningPaul: Thanks for you comment. I agree it looks indeed a bit artificial but also a bit dreamy. While tone mapping you get soooooo easily tempted to make it more artistic than natural looking.
Here is one which looks pretty natural to me (29th of Sept): http://lightningpaul.shutterchance.com/photoblog/Castle_of_Reinhardstein_%281_of_3%29_/

Framed and Shot

United States

15 Oct 2008, 18:51

Great!
We like your point of view - and the nice texture on the towers.
We much prefer this one to the previous - This is an excellent hdr, but we do hope number 3 is a bit more "overdone", with more graphic touch to it. With this image we believe you can add quite a bit more, maybe even to the extreme!
Looking forward to the next!

LightningPaul: Thank you for your commenting. Indeed, it can be "overdone" much more but then it fully gets this "cliché HDR look" and too strong colors, which can be very beautiful (see www.stuckincustoms.com). But I prefer not to make it my style (at least for now).
Making it "overdone" is OK if you have less colors, see tomorrow

Bill Phillips

United Kingdom

15 Oct 2008, 19:28

Thank you for this well explained demonstration Paul. This is a much better image for my money!

LightningPaul: Thanks Bill, I appreciate that. Both images are for you for free

JM@somedaysomewhere.net

France

15 Oct 2008, 20:55

this is really amazing - looks like the two big legs of a giant (with a small body

looking at me !! fantastic rendering of the tower textures and of the clouds..

LightningPaul: Wow, great imagination you have

Thanks for commenting.

Michael Paulison

United States

16 Oct 2008, 06:52

I really like the black and white version a lot, but I'm very partial to blue and tan together in photos, so I really like this one as well. This is gorgeous.

Giorgio

Great Britain (UK)

17 Oct 2008, 19:32

I think this is a very good HDR shot and I prefer it. BW version is a beautiful image but this is more

IMHO the presence of halos is a very bad effect in many HDR images and you have avoided this: well done, Paul!

LightningPaul: Your comment is much appreciated. I'll make more HDR images without the nasty halos and "HDR effects". Thanks Giorgio.

Giorgio

Italy

19 Oct 2008, 11:11

I saw your other HDR works and you always avoided nasty halos and ipersaturated colors, is it right? So, I think there are two HDR philosophies: photographic one - no halo, no strong "HDR effect", only contrast and details - and artistic one - a lot of halos, more colors saturation, further from the reality. And IMHO it's the taste and sensibility of the author/photographer that determine the choise.

LightningPaul: Your are right about it. The high range needs to be tone mapped to a low range, hence choices must be made. Some try to make it look real, others become very artistic. It's all a matter of taste. Here you see my current style.
I appreciate your comment a lot.

random photoblogs.org vfxy permalink vazaar photo community coolphotoblogs

	name

	email

	send me a copy
	fill in code

	in this box

	name

	email
	up to 5 e-mails, separated using commas
	optional message

	(max. 1,000 characters)