HDR (informative article)

[Beaux Reflets]

A useful link to an article on HDR (Well I found it very informative and useful)

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/high-dynamic-range.htm?fb_action_ids=4701351172754&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%224701351172754%22%3A455973132957%7D&action_type_map=%7B%224701351172754%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=[]

[Hinfrance]

Probably very good Andy, but it requires Photoshop, and I don't have £600 lying around for a bit of software.

You might want to have a look at Dynamic Photo HDR as an affordable HDR editor.

[Beaux Reflets]

I have not got Photoshop either for the same reason. I just found the basic practical explanations very informative even for manual HDR  images compiled using different exposures and blending them in layers. Are there any useful and good freebie HDR editing programs? although I do enjoy the longer hands on approach, rather than quick fix automation's that then need tweaking.

[donoreo]

Probably very good Andy, but it requires Photoshop, and I don't have £600 lying around for a bit of software.

You might want to have a look at Dynamic Photo HDR as an affordable HDR editor.

Or something completely free (in cost and it is open source software) http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net/ Luminance HDR. 

[Hinfrance]

Or something completely free (in cost and it is open source software) http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net/ Luminance HDR. 

Thanks for the link - the last time I looked at this it was truly dreadful - but that was years ago. I shall download it and have a fiddle with the new version forthwith

[Beaux Reflets]

Probably very good Andy, but it requires Photoshop, and I don't have £600 lying around for a bit of software.

You might want to have a look at Dynamic Photo HDR as an affordable HDR editor.

Or something completely free (in cost and it is open source software) http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net/ Luminance HDR.

Will take a look - cheers for the link Donoreo

[donoreo]

I have only given it a quick play so I cannot say how good it is.  I have also never used any other HDR software.

[Karen]

I use Photomatix and find its very controllable.

[jinky]

Yes I think Photomatix is hard to beat. Don`t use it as much as I did with my D80 but still get great results when I dip in again. You can go over the top when the subject suits or my favourite activity is to present one to many of the HDR haters and them not realise it is an hdr. Did a print swap at a Leeds Flickr event once and a guy who saw HDR as the work of the devil loved it when he was able to get a landscape of mine. I loved it more when  I told him it was an hdr 

[donoreo]

Yes I think Photomatix is hard to beat. Don`t use it as much as I did with my D80 but still get great results when I dip in again. You can go over the top when the subject suits or my favourite activity is to present one to many of the HDR haters and them not realise it is an hdr. Did a print swap at a Leeds Flickr event once and a guy who saw HDR as the work of the devil loved it when he was able to get a landscape of mine. I loved it more when  I told him it was an hdr 

To me that means you processed it correctly.  I do not like HDRs that look like HDRs. 

[jinky]

Fort me there is no correct or incorrect and different subjects might benefit from different processing. I did some shots in Valencia last year that looked wonderfully futuristic to me and suited the OTT HDR processing and I took the photos for me so why not. Similarly I processed some in a standard way - it was the hdrs that got the comments and had the wow factor. Depends what you are aiming for and I don`t see why anyone can state they hate HDR like the Leeds guy did when there are so many variations on the theme. You love or hate the resulting picture whether it is hdr or not and with photomatix you can blend images too so it`s a great tool.