• Last Updated:
  • Jul 6th, 2008 6:52 am
Tags:
None
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 18, 2006
1785 posts
31 upvotes

Simple HDR question

Hey guys, I've been into photography for a few years, but recently got into HDR today. I downloaded the trial version of Photomatix and it's been fun playing with it (if anyone knows where I can get a good,free program tell me please!).

Anyways, from what I understand, HDR photographs are like a mix between different photographs of different exposures. So how exactly do you take an HDR image of something that is moving? Wouldn't each photograph be different?

Thanks!
8 replies
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 16, 2007
6806 posts
563 upvotes
Jyeatbvg69 wrote:
Jul 6th, 2008 12:28 am
Hey guys, I've been into photography for a few years, but recently got into HDR today. I downloaded the trial version of Photomatix and it's been fun playing with it (if anyone knows where I can get a good,free program tell me please!).

Anyways, from what I understand, HDR photographs are like a mix between different photographs of different exposures. So how exactly do you take an HDR image of something that is moving? Wouldn't each photograph be different?

Thanks!
From what I read on it before, you can't (or at least not easily)

HDR is mostly for stills, like architecture... even humans can be ridiculously hard to do due to slight movements...

I'm no expert on the subject, but from what I recall it was 1 over exposed, 1 under exposed, and 1 normal, and it mixes the highlights and shadows right?

I assume if you are a photoshop wizard you could figure out a way to shop the moving area out of 2 of the photos, although you'd loose the effects and it would take a lot of post processing... may or may not work... alternately maybe you could take one photo, and then duplicate it twice and change the exposures and see if that works (I have no idea if it will, again I'm not an expert so don't take my word!!) but search for tutorials, there are a couple great ones that I had on my other pc, I'll post when I can.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 1, 2004
12862 posts
1466 upvotes
Pickering
Jyeatbvg69 wrote:
Jul 6th, 2008 12:28 am
Hey guys, I've been into photography for a few years, but recently got into HDR today. I downloaded the trial version of Photomatix and it's been fun playing with it (if anyone knows where I can get a good,free program tell me please!).

Anyways, from what I understand, HDR photographs are like a mix between different photographs of different exposures. So how exactly do you take an HDR image of something that is moving? Wouldn't each photograph be different?

Thanks!
You can't.

Ok, I lied because I do.

First, the faster the camera, the better.Now, I use photoshop CS3 because I do not like Photomatix, so I am not sure if this will work for you. Anyway, if I HDR merge multiple photos, anything that moves will cause pastel coloured anomalies. I then take a properly exposed single image from the merge and drag the merged image over it. Then I use a layer mask and expose the properly exposed image in the spots where things have moved.Works like a charm.

Lots of different things moving = lots of work to fix the photos.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 18, 2006
1785 posts
31 upvotes
Thank you for both your quick and thorough replies. Much appreciated!

Also, while I remember, is there an easy way to take HDR (multiple) photos without a tripod? Or should I just lean the camera on something. Do you guys always bring tripods around to take HDR photos?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 16, 2007
6806 posts
563 upvotes
AudiDude wrote:
Jul 6th, 2008 12:45 am
You can't.

Ok, I lied because I do.

First, the faster the camera, the better.Now, I use photoshop CS3 because I do not like Photomatix, so I am not sure if this will work for you. Anyway, if I HDR merge multiple photos, anything that moves will cause pastel coloured anomalies. I then take a properly exposed single image from the merge and drag the merged image over it. Then I use a layer mask and expose the properly exposed image in the spots where things have moved.Works like a charm.

Lots of different things moving = lots of work to fix the photos.
Looks like my theory does work then! Seems like a ton of work though... but beautiful results I'm sure. You'd have to be a PS moderate to advanced user to do perfect layer masking and such though.

Jyeatbvg69 wrote:
Jul 6th, 2008 12:48 am
Thank you for both your quick and thorough replies. Much appreciated!

Also, while I remember, is there an easy way to take HDR (multiple) photos without a tripod? Or should I just lean the camera on something. Do you guys always bring tripods around to take HDR photos?
The quality of your HDR will depend highly on the exact reproduction of 3 images with different settings, and the easiest way to do this would be with a tripod. Alternatively you could set the camera on something and do the same thing, but I would say if you are shooting with the intent of doing HDR then a tripod is a must (probably a remote as well)
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 5, 2006
4912 posts
211 upvotes
Toronto
Although this isn't "true" HDR; just take a RAW picture of the scene and photomatrix wilert it to a HDR image. It is argued that even a RAW file is not the same as 3 different exposures but I saw the picture difference and in situations you have a moving subject; it will look the same. I took 3 pics at 3 different exposures and used the single RAW file; and it came out looking very similar.

If your camera doesn't support RAW; you need to have a camera that has autobracketing and you take 3 shoots under continous mode and it will give you 3 different exposures.

Speaking from my images though; 3 exposures isn't sufficient to capture the range of the scene; i took 6 different exposures and it gave me MUCH more range than my 3 original pictures. THis might be good if you have a tripod and your object is not moving.

Automatrix also makes very NOISY pictures and not realistic. I would use CS if you are concerned about images actually capturing all the range and not looking abnormal.

Here are my pseudo HDR images with 1 RAW file since I had no tripod (photomatrix - 100 ISO AF; even with a Rebel XT; it is a very noisy picture):

[IMG]http://imusion.net/asad/Canon/rfdhdr.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://imusion.net/asad/Canon/rfdhdr2.jpg[/IMG]
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 1, 2004
12862 posts
1466 upvotes
Pickering
Jyeatbvg69 wrote:
Jul 6th, 2008 12:48 am
Thank you for both your quick and thorough replies. Much appreciated!

Also, while I remember, is there an easy way to take HDR (multiple) photos without a tripod? Or should I just lean the camera on something. Do you guys always bring tripods around to take HDR photos?
No, I do handheld as well with a 60% success rate and a monopod will boost that by another 15%. If you have an IS (or similar) lens and you are shooting at 1/80 or up that will help lots. Again, if you move the method for fixing moving things in the picture with photoshop can apply. The 40D with its high framerates is key to getting the shots as well. The girlfriend has a 400D and at 3 FPS, it isn't the ideal camera for handheld HDR or images with things that move.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 1, 2004
12862 posts
1466 upvotes
Pickering
matdwyer wrote:
Jul 6th, 2008 1:38 am
Looks like my theory does work then! Seems like a ton of work though... but beautiful results I'm sure. You'd have to be a PS moderate to advanced user to do perfect layer masking and such though.




The quality of your HDR will depend highly on the exact reproduction of 3 images with different settings, and the easiest way to do this would be with a tripod. Alternatively you could set the camera on something and do the same thing, but I would say if you are shooting with the intent of doing HDR then a tripod is a must (probably a remote as well)
I'm not sure where I lie in terms of being a PS user, but I have zero training. I could show anybody to do the technique I outlined in 15 minutes. I do use a tripod and a remote for my best HDRs and have discovered 3 weeks ago that using a cpol seems to differ the shots as you change the exposure so much, they cannot be merged. In this case you need to place the pictures on top of each other and mask out what you don't want. Or, so long as you took a decent properly exposed or slightly overexposed picture, you could photoshop it a little to help out.

Top