2008/7/25 Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > You've managed a decent balance with this one. It does seem to be a > more difficult technique to use well than first glance would make it > appear.
Thanks Godfrey. HDR, or rather tonemapping, has indeed a few quirks of its own. > I've been looking at a lot of HDR work these days. Overall, the *vast* > majority of it looks hideously over-processed and awful to my eye. > Some few people apply the technique with subtlety and get results that > are actually an improvement on a straight exposure, but those seem the > rare exception as yet. > > I've been meaning to try Photomatix, just haven't found the time yet. Photomatix has a tendency to produce too saturated colours in the tonemapped images. Same goes for easyHDR, a competing software package. Autopano can also do HDR, but also suffer from overly saturated defaults. So far the Autopano seems easier to tweak, but it has fewer levers to pull. OTOH, Autopano has a definitive advantage if your exposures were obtained hand-held. It's in a league of its own when it comes to aligning images. If you look at the Photomatix homepage, there's an extensive gallery of images produced by users. Many are weird, but there _are_ examples of excellent renderings too. Jostein -- http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ http://alunfoto.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
