Post processing images - The final step to getting that awesome click

[izzikio_rage]

I too like the bw version of the image, i think even a vintage look would suit this. Will give it a shot this weekend

 

[marvelousprashant]

more raw images please. Or even jpegs

 

[Gen.Libeb]

more raw images please. Or even jpegs

Here you go. Three RAW files for HDR this time.
The beach is a little dirty. If some one attempts to clean and clone it up it'll be an added bonus.


*www.dropbox.com/s/iw9ypdsm5a3vytt/IMG_2550.dng

*www.dropbox.com/s/twvlc7o6grayayb/IMG_2551.dng

*www.dropbox.com/s/ophn14pabs2gxbp/IMG_2552.dng

 

[marvelousprashant]

Sharing one of my edits... as everyone liked the end result

Step 1: Planning
I wanted to do a realistic looking HDR Panorama

Step 2: Shooting
As expected, shot 3 images per frame and 2 frames in total

Frame 1

*i.imgur.com/hNdPbNIl.jpg

*i.imgur.com/oe8S1EWl.jpg

*i.imgur.com/8beRyvAl.jpg

Frame 2

*i.imgur.com/7RqKgoml.jpg

*i.imgur.com/i3E5mHhl.jpg

*i.imgur.com/sEyINjpl.jpg

HDR 1: Done using Photomatrix Natural Preset

*i.imgur.com/drpfb6il.jpg

HDR 2

*i.imgur.com/9zTTTOPl.jpg

Panorama: Stitched using Microsoft ICE

*i.imgur.com/kyYCuv3l.jpg

FINAL: Using Lightroom

*farm8.staticflickr.com/7308/12384117223_51d7387417.jpg

 

[nac]

Prashant, Nice one... Your favourite spot? Feels like dejavu...

Gen, People are walking....there will be ghosting if 3 images are stacked for HDR.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think I am smart enough to avoid ghosting, so I didn't opt for 3 picture HDR. I picked the 0EV photo and photomatix made single photo HDR.

*i.imgur.com/N37f8dG.jpg

The same photo, but my usual PP.

*i.imgur.com/97rIZQW.jpg

 

[izzikio_rage]

How did you turn the sky blue while retaining the gold hue of the beach.

Very cool shots both of you

 

[Gen.Libeb]

[MENTION=117627]marvelousprashant[/MENTION] - Thats nicely done, The result looks awesome. Thanks for sharing.

[MENTION=125321]nac[/MENTION] I like the 2nd one. Don't like black and white border.
Is a single photo HDR really an HDR ? Does this question even make sense ?

I see you guys are using Photomatix. How is it ? I mean do you get what you want out of it ?

Here's my attempt using 3 photos and layer masking in photoshop but its boring and took me over an hour & now I think I overdid it on the contrast and the blacks.
I didn't see any advantage of using RAW files for HDR. Making the most out of it will be even more time consuming.

*farm6.staticflickr.com/5337/13709485143_f4df18ea45_b.jpg

 

[marvelousprashant]

Photomatrix presets are decent. I usually choose between default and natural presets. For any kind of editing I prefer LR. Oloneo is another option for HDR

 

[nac]

Gen, You're the second one (in the recent times) to point that the black and white border is not good. Guys, is it "that bad"

Our forum background is light colour, and I liked and noticed that viewing the photographs in dark background is better. So the reason for black border. (most of my flickr images don't have any kinda border) The thin white line I put (usually) to make it clear to see the edge of the photographs (don't want black border and photograph merging and make it little hard to notice where the edge of the photograph is). May be these two photographs I posted don't need that white border.

After all, taking photographs is not the only thing, as an amateur/enthusiast we do PP and all... Presenting the photographs is also matters, I believe (or am I wrong?). Since this border doesn't seem appealing, any suggestion what I should do with regards to border. Should I add border or get rid of that.

I don't get that "Is a single photo HDR really an HDR ? Does this question even make sense?"
If that means, "that doesn't even look like HDR", then that's me
If that means, "how can you make HDR with single exposure", then it's YES. It's possible. After all it's RAW, what we feed to those software is +1/0/-1 exposure. If we just feed one exposure, photomatix push +1 and -1 to get the other two exposure for HDR.

How did you turn the sky blue while retaining the gold hue of the beach.
Very cool shots both of you

Is that me or Prashant?

 

[marvelousprashant]

[MENTION=125321]nac[/MENTION] you must have seen it on my flickr. it is an old shot.
Anyway , my attempt at HDR
*i.imgur.com/sTIx4Lbl.jpg

- - - Updated - - -
[MENTION=125321]nac[/MENTION] you could have used 'reduce ghosts' setting in photomatrix. Method 'automatic' and detection 'high' did it for me

 

[izzikio_rage]

Is that me or Prashant?

Was asking you only

 

[nac]

Was asking you only

Confused...
Used GND (added blue) in LR

Prashant, I will try that in Photomatix. There is no ghosting in yours...

 

[Gen.Libeb]

After all, taking photographs is not the only thing, as an amateur/enthusiast we do PP and all... Presenting the photographs is also matters, I believe (or am I wrong?). Since this border doesn't seem appealing, any suggestion what I should do with regards to border. Should I add border or get rid of that.

Keep the border - 0
Get rid of it - 1

I don't get that "Is a single photo HDR really an HDR ? Does this question even make sense?"
If that means, "that doesn't even look like HDR", then that's me
If that means, "how can you make HDR with single exposure", then it's YES. It's possible. After all it's RAW, what we feed to those software is +1/0/-1 exposure. If we just feed one exposure, photomatix push +1 and -1 to get the other two exposure for HDR.

So by that way more images will mean even more HDR.

[MENTION=117627]marvelousprashant[/MENTION] - Now that looks like a sunrise.

 

[nac]

^ lol... Should I start poll or what
I have seen pictures that are composite of many pictures (one was, set of 20 (20 x 3) to make one HDR photograph.

 

[marvelousprashant]

I have done composite of 3-4 images using 5 images for HDR (4x5)

- - - Updated - - -

a good way to use this thread will be to upload your unedited pics [raw or jpegs] and let others play with it either according to the demand of the uploader or their own imagination

 

[nac]

Yeah, Gen is most generous so far (so the reason he picked his ID as Gen ).

 

[nac]

This is the same photograph I just posted in photography thread. Here I am posting it along with jpeg version to see if there any difference we could see without a magnifying glass.

I am sure your eyes are trained enough to spot which one is RAW and jpeg or at least the one I am gonna share... The point is, it's not the evident RAW was better here as far as details, colours, sharpness etc. when viewing the whole picture (not the crop).

I don't think I will have to say which one is RAW and which one is jpeg.

*i.imgur.com/TvkIuo4.jpg

*i.imgur.com/YMkcw6S.jpg

For those who couldn't find it. Here are 100% crop and few clues...

Spoiler

*i.imgur.com/vij31ii.jpg

*i.imgur.com/mKomdHe.jpg

1. Recently, I think it was Gen said something about FOV of RAW and jpeg.
2. Noise level and sharpness.
3. Shadow details.

 

[marvelousprashant]

RAW is never better than jpeg. Common misconception. RAW just contains more data than jpeg so that you can pull out details from blown highlights and shadows. Also RAW responds better to noise reduction and sharpness

 

[sujoyp]

ok soo in picture 2nd one is RAW and in spoiler right one with less exposure, more grains is RAW

In any case as a picture its looking great...or else people will complain me of pixelpeeping

 

[nac]

Sujoy, 10 out of 10

Prashant, That's something new. Will see how RAW/jpeg responds to NR and sharpness.