I hear you, Igor. Yes, indeed, since I got my *istD I shot no more than
10 films (in almost 3 years)...
And indeed with digital some kind of HDR solution would be necessary.
Well, I think I'd rather play with gray gradient filters 'cause I am
very reluctant to do any serious post-processing.
Boris,
Yes, that's indeed an option. Although, I should admit, I haven't
used the film camera since I got DS.
It would not be a convenient option to have two bodies during a
vacation trip where we tried to fly without checking in any luggage
(except for the return trip, where we had to check in
My advise is to bracket exposure.
I haven't as yet had much luck with HDR, so I just layer the bracketed
shots and paint on masks for the bits I do, and don't, want.
Cheers,
Dave
On Dec 10, 2007 5:14 PM, Igor Roshchin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Boris,
Yes, that's indeed an option. Although,
David Savage wrote:
My advise is to bracket exposure.
I haven't as yet had much luck with HDR, so I just layer the bracketed
shots and paint on masks for the bits I do, and don't, want.
Apparently I'm ignorant, because I thought that was the basic idea of
HDR processing anyway.
--
Thanks,
On Dec 11, 2007 9:57 AM, Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Savage wrote:
My advise is to bracket exposure.
I haven't as yet had much luck with HDR, so I just layer the bracketed
shots and paint on masks for the bits I do, and don't, want.
Apparently I'm ignorant, because I
Igor, I sincerely think that taking a film camera with good negative
film along might help. Another option of course is to use gray gradient
filters in order to lower the d.r.
Boris
Igor Roshchin wrote:
Does anybody have any tips on how to best shoot such shots
with or without HDR in mind?
Yes, I shot them in RAW.
What I've done in the shot quoted is essentially changing the
response curve - compressing some regions and bringing up others.
Do you think what you suggest would be much different?
It is the same information that would be used, so the only difference
would be that
The response curve will change similar tones everywhere. For example
you want to darken the sky, but some of the foreground has a patch of
something the same general brightness of the sky, you don't want to
change that. Just changing the curve will effect both, in this
hypothetical you need
Sorry, I don't have any experience with how PS does the HDR,
but I would naively assume that the same dilemma would be when
you try to combine two (or whatever number) layers.
Of course, masking a part of the photo would be the way out of it.
Is this what you have in mind, or you are talking
Actually I use masking and layer transparency. But even if you're not
using Photoshop whatever software you're using to combine the exposures
is using layers of a sort. It's just easier than doing it by hand. I
expect an expert using layers could do a better job, not that I could,
but an
We had a very nice trip to the Andes in Argentina.
The views were breathtaking.
One of the challenges was the large dynamic range, especially
in the afternoon, when shadows appeared.
At one point I was trying to get the wild flowers in front, the
mountains in the back, and the high-contrast
If you shot them in RAW you could convert them with different exposure
compensation for each conversion then combine. That works rather well.
Igor Roshchin wrote:
We had a very nice trip to the Andes in Argentina.
The views were breathtaking.
One of the challenges was the large dynamic
12 matches
Mail list logo
