Question about 1 File HDR Images

[battlestation]

When I take a photo in RAW and use it to create an HDR image it comes out all green. Why would this be and how to make it come out in color and not just greens.


Thanks for your time.

[Murtasma]

What software are you using? How are you creating the HDR from one RAW file there are several ways to do this.

[Nicole]

This sort of question might be better posted in the Post-Processing section (http://digital-photography-school.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=17) :) The "Before and After" forum is for showing off what you've done.

[battlestation]

I asked a mod to move this topic.

Using Photomatix one file conversion. I tried the Trail Version of FDPTools and it worked pretty well. But i would really like to use photomatix.

[Chico]

You cannot make an HDR file out of one(1) image. You need minimum two(2) pictures and above to actually produce a High Dynamic image and...to give you 16bits of information (or more).

[jiminyClickit]

Chico, Welcome

Do you mean in-camera images, or manipulated images in an edit program produced from one (1) image? Done well, it's difficult to see the difference. I always add two, sometimes up to five. Depends on photo and goal.

[Chico]

I think I understand what you're saying...I think.

How I do/understand HDR is I photograph a scene from the highest f/stop I feel is necessary to the lowest f/stop I feel is good (all in Raw format btw). That way I get as much info in High's and Low's. To me in order to produce an HDR picture I need all of that info which, the way I understand it gets put in the bitdepth.

Once I have all of my images I then combine them into one. I won't touch/manipulate the originals because I will loose info a.k.a. the comb teeth effect in Levels. What happens is that whatever software I use will analize and combine all of that info by averaging it and produce an HDR file.

Once I have the file I then go and teak it. If I use CS2 I can have up to 32bits of info per color (from that averaging). If I manipulate lets say the curve I will not loose noticeable quality because I have all of that info already stored in there but...I need that info. If it's not there to start with I can't make it happen out of nowhere.

Something like that. Remember I'm no pro so...I could be way out in left field on this one however...if I wish to produce quality I need ingredients and if I don't have them to start with well...

[jiminyClickit]

Chico,

My total experience with HDR and layering successfully: two months with tutorials on DPS. So if you are "no pro," I may be in the minus column. But on this forum, where the learning is slightly less about extreme accuracy and measurements of photo quality, and perhaps more in the common area of what constitutes a "darn fine picture," I have trouble distinguishing between a true in-camera 3-photograph-sourced HDR, and a rendered one using editting to create multi-layers of one photograph. This says more about my eyesight and relaxed need for exact-anything.

You are doing a skilled process; I'm doing something that makes some dull photos stand out, look better, become worth displaying. I just wondered if you could tell the difference, if both methods were applied to the same photograph, in the DPS/Flickr format.

[Chico]

Just look at how vivid the colours are. Look at the dark areas of a picture. See about the details and compare it to the lighter are and ask yourself:"Did this get taken in one shot?" Does it stands out almost like a 3D image?
If you can tell as much details in the light as in the dark areas or vice-versa where it would be impossible in normal conditions then you have a true HDR photograph.

[jiminyClickit]

Chico,

It's still subjective, eyesight varying as it does, and color sensibility. The description you gave is what sold me on doing layering of all kinds in the first place, and is the goal I set for each photo I work on.

Not long ago an HDR of a living room was posted; frankly, it wasn't so impressive. Might not have been an experienced individual. Some of the tutorial examples are better, but maybe I haven't seen a really good example. If you posted a sample of one you've done, and then let me work on just the middle version in my 7 year-old edit program, we'd have something to compare. Game?

(Found it: HDR - Livingroom http://robcwilliams.com/wordpress/?p=12#more-12 )

[Chico]

How true...HDR can make or break a picture that's for sure...just like the over-use of filters.
I'll post a picture yes...however you will have to share your workflow if we both deemed your picture to be just as good or better than mine ;)

Now hopefully no purist(s) will get a hold of this post hehehe

I'm new to this forum and I don't believe I can post a picture unless I join flker or whatever it's called so...go here under HDR http://www.dimeonline.ws/fotos/index.html

[Nicole]

Argh! HDR! Impure! :D ;) Ok, I just had to say it Chico, couldn't help myself... I'm totally kidding.

I've got to say though, those HDR shots of yours are gorgeous. I'd count them as an example of well done HDR.

[jiminyClickit]

Chico,

The winner will be anyone who knows more about editting than photography right now. Or who has a point/shoot, and wants to ramp up the picture quality in post. Or whoever may want to adjust an old photo that can't be taken again for HDR bracketing.

I've got Rob Williams' middle photograph from his blog about HDR, to see how close I can get to what he did. Stay tuned . . .

[Chico]

Winner..?
I don't see any winners or loosers in this my friend. All I see is learning

Oh...and Nicole ~~~there...been a while since I stuck my tongue out at a girl...wish I could do the hands/fingers beside the head however ;)

Now that my childish moment's come n'gone...Tanx...glad you liked them :]

[jiminyClickit]

Chico,

If your technique was deemed better overall, I would consider that winning the comparison, and I would have learned something. Now about those purists . . .

[Chico]

Every time I close my eyes I see purists ;)