R50/53 HDR Pic of my MINI...
HDR Pics of my MINI...
Well, it's about time I did my MINI justice! I've been working with HDR photography for the past couple of months so I thought it time to get one of my Royal Grey '06 MINI. HDR is amazing! It allows you to capture what your eye would see in all the contrast and color levels, and then enables you to add an artistic flair. Here it is:


Thanks,
Al


Thanks,
Al
Last edited by ASC; Sep 4, 2007 at 10:05 PM.
Motor On,
I'm using Photomatix Pro, current version. Also, I'm using Noiseware as part of my digital darkroom.
Sometimes (or many times), I feel like HDR can go waaaay overboard. Too much halo'ing or really unnatural coloring. While I certainly appreciate tone mapping, I feel like some moderation is the key.
Thanks,
Al
I'm using Photomatix Pro, current version. Also, I'm using Noiseware as part of my digital darkroom.
Sometimes (or many times), I feel like HDR can go waaaay overboard. Too much halo'ing or really unnatural coloring. While I certainly appreciate tone mapping, I feel like some moderation is the key.
Thanks,
Al
HDR is High Dynamic Range. You can actually process RAW files into HDR. I've done that too. What HDR offers is the ability to capture a much higher range of contrast and color than a single snapshot can.
Think of it this way: Have you ever been somewhere scenic, taken a picture to remember it, but then after developing it or viewing it on screen, you say to yourself, "I know I was there, but it doesn't look like what I remember?" That's because your eyes can see a contrast ratio of tens of thousands to 1, where a simple snapshot is only a few thousands to 1.
Since RAW files capture a much larger range of information, they can be processed to yield an HDR result, providing you've shot the RAW at the proper exposure settings.
Thanks,
Al
Think of it this way: Have you ever been somewhere scenic, taken a picture to remember it, but then after developing it or viewing it on screen, you say to yourself, "I know I was there, but it doesn't look like what I remember?" That's because your eyes can see a contrast ratio of tens of thousands to 1, where a simple snapshot is only a few thousands to 1.
Since RAW files capture a much larger range of information, they can be processed to yield an HDR result, providing you've shot the RAW at the proper exposure settings.
Thanks,
Al
Trending Topics
Another use for HDR is where you've got portions of your scene that would be over-exposed if you tried to capture all the details in the shadowed areas.
For example, if you've ever taken an interior picture of a room that has windows when it's sunny outside, you'll know what I mean. If you set the exposure to correctly capture all of the detail inside the room, then the windows will just be white overexposed rectangles, and you won't be able to see outside. But if you expose correctly to be able to see what's outside the window, the interior of the room will be too dark.
To use HDR in this case, you could actually take multiple shots of the same scene, varying the exposure between the shots. Then the HDR software will combine the parts of the various exposures to give you one final picture where all parts of the scene are exposed correctly - you don't lose any details in the shadows, and you don't have "blown-out" overexposed sections.
You can go here to see an HDR shot of the interior of a factory. The HDR hasn't been over-used here - in fact, it doesn't jump out at you at all, but if you were to try to duplicate this shot without HDR, it would be almost impossible to capture the details way back in the back of the scene without totally overexposing the stuff closer to the camera.
If you go to www.flickr.com and search for "HDR", you'll see a bunch more examples.
EDIT - I should have mentioned that if you're going to combine multiple exposures using HDR, everything in your scene needs to be pretty much stationary, and you need to take the multiple exposures with a tripod, so that everything will be in the same place for all of the shots. You can do limited HDR with a single RAW exposure, but even the dynamic range of a single RAW exposure isn't close to what our eyes are capable of.
For example, if you've ever taken an interior picture of a room that has windows when it's sunny outside, you'll know what I mean. If you set the exposure to correctly capture all of the detail inside the room, then the windows will just be white overexposed rectangles, and you won't be able to see outside. But if you expose correctly to be able to see what's outside the window, the interior of the room will be too dark.
To use HDR in this case, you could actually take multiple shots of the same scene, varying the exposure between the shots. Then the HDR software will combine the parts of the various exposures to give you one final picture where all parts of the scene are exposed correctly - you don't lose any details in the shadows, and you don't have "blown-out" overexposed sections.
You can go here to see an HDR shot of the interior of a factory. The HDR hasn't been over-used here - in fact, it doesn't jump out at you at all, but if you were to try to duplicate this shot without HDR, it would be almost impossible to capture the details way back in the back of the scene without totally overexposing the stuff closer to the camera.
If you go to www.flickr.com and search for "HDR", you'll see a bunch more examples.
EDIT - I should have mentioned that if you're going to combine multiple exposures using HDR, everything in your scene needs to be pretty much stationary, and you need to take the multiple exposures with a tripod, so that everything will be in the same place for all of the shots. You can do limited HDR with a single RAW exposure, but even the dynamic range of a single RAW exposure isn't close to what our eyes are capable of.
Last edited by ScottRiqui; Sep 5, 2007 at 12:36 AM.
Welcome to NAM.
Excellent pictures.
I wonder if my screen is not up to your picture quality.
Like viewing fine art through dirty glass.
I need a 1080i quality monitor.
Keep posting more but realize you are making us jealous.
Excellent pictures.
I wonder if my screen is not up to your picture quality.

Like viewing fine art through dirty glass.
I need a 1080i quality monitor.
Keep posting more but realize you are making us jealous.
HDR stands for High Dynamic Range. It's a method of processing images, typically in RAW format taken by an SLR, to produce images that more accurately portray what our eyes can see (and sometimes above and beyond that).
The wikipedia entry is a good place to learn more.
To see a variety of HDR images, check out this link to flickr: HDR Images.
The wikipedia entry is a good place to learn more.
To see a variety of HDR images, check out this link to flickr: HDR Images.
Nice HDR work. It is difficult to keep HDR shots from looking muddy. Your images look great.
I've not had much luck with HDR so I often use masks for different areas of the image at different exposures. The Pt. Lobos photo in my misc. gallery is an example. Couldn't keep the "snap" to it with HDR.
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/misc.html
This was a scene of extremely bright sun on sea foam vs. deep shaded plants. IIRC, it was shot on a tripod with different exposures. That method can handle a much greater range of brightness that pulling different versions out of a RAW file.
I've not had much luck with HDR so I often use masks for different areas of the image at different exposures. The Pt. Lobos photo in my misc. gallery is an example. Couldn't keep the "snap" to it with HDR.
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/misc.html
This was a scene of extremely bright sun on sea foam vs. deep shaded plants. IIRC, it was shot on a tripod with different exposures. That method can handle a much greater range of brightness that pulling different versions out of a RAW file.
Robin,
Nice photos! I agree with you, HDR can sometimes become "muddy". I try to shoot all my HDR shots with F8 or higher - it seems to keep the detail sharp.
I don't always shoot HDR. There's still the allure of being able to capture what you can with the right exposure and lighting with minimal editing. Looks like you've got that part down!
Thanks,
Al
Nice photos! I agree with you, HDR can sometimes become "muddy". I try to shoot all my HDR shots with F8 or higher - it seems to keep the detail sharp.
I don't always shoot HDR. There's still the allure of being able to capture what you can with the right exposure and lighting with minimal editing. Looks like you've got that part down!
Thanks,
Al
Love your work Robin!
ASC - I ride by that site every morning on the train if I'm not mistaken. We need to get you to join MINI5280 if you have not done so. There would be a lot of good photo ops for you to capture. If you are not a member check out www.MINI5280.org for more info. Love your photos, HDR or NOT.
ASC - I ride by that site every morning on the train if I'm not mistaken. We need to get you to join MINI5280 if you have not done so. There would be a lot of good photo ops for you to capture. If you are not a member check out www.MINI5280.org for more info. Love your photos, HDR or NOT.
Last edited by MiniMaybee; Sep 7, 2007 at 04:51 AM.
Please post your first shot in the sunset thread. That's a really nice shot.
I've seen too many HDR shots on Flickr that look fake, or like paintings. I think some people think it saves their crappy shots. Keep the finish results "normal" looking like you have.
I've seen too many HDR shots on Flickr that look fake, or like paintings. I think some people think it saves their crappy shots. Keep the finish results "normal" looking like you have.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Steffen.Johnson
R50/R53 :: Hatch Talk (2002-2006)
42
Jan 25, 2023 02:47 PM
MINI Stupor
R50/R53 :: Hatch Talk (2002-2006)
3
Oct 1, 2015 11:36 AM



Very very niiiiiiice. 


