From my latest shoot, C&C welcome!
From my latest shoot, C&C welcome!
Are my eyes fooling me or is that car literally an inch above the ground? I like the shot, and the car.
Nope... it's actually less then an inch I think. As you can see in this next picture (unedited), it's fucking loooooooooow:
Oxford University Dorms
Last edited by Pollywog; 09-07-2010 at 07:38 AM.
I like the shot - but would be curious what the photo would look like with the horizon straightened?Originally posted by psycoticclown
From my latest shoot, C&C welcome!
So my wife and I went out to Dorothy yesterday and took some shots. In most of them, I used 3 stepped frames and then put them together in Photoshop. I know not everyone is keen on HDR, but that's too bad. This was my first attempt actually doing HDR shots, and despite the fact they might look heavily modified, I think they generally turned out ok.
My fav. shot of the bunch.
Purposely made to look errie.
There is a little image ghosting on this one. My wife can't sit still, apparently.
I really like this one because I put the light of the window behind me. So it looks like I'm glowing with God's love!
While I don't mind HDR, there are many processes after the merging and tone-mapping that should be applied to balance what the initial processes has thrown out of wack. Example, the clouds, lighting imbalances, and over-darkening of the sky.
I agree Pollywog. These shots were just my first experimentations with HDR - and in all four cases I put online, I never intended a single one of them to look photorealistic.
These ones I edited with CS5's HDR capabilities. There are three at home I will add later which I did by hand, and WERE intended to be photorealistic. You'll see a big difference between the sets.
mine
09 Ford F150 Lariat / 01 Porsche 911 Turbo / 04 AP2 S2000 / 00 Jeep TJ Sahara / 67 VW Beetle / 71 Vespa / 05 Ducati 999r / 05 Honda RC51SP2 / 03 Ducati Monster 1000s / 74 Honda CB750 / 75 Honda CB750 / 96 Kawasaki ZX7RR N1 / 08 Ducati Monster S4RS TriColore
I wasn't trying to infer that it should look realistic - everyone has their own taste. I prefer my HDR to look more painted than anything.Originally posted by Kloubek
I agree Pollywog. These shots were just my first experimentations with HDR - and in all four cases I put online, I never intended a single one of them to look photorealistic.
These ones I edited with CS5's HDR capabilities. There are three at home I will add later which I did by hand, and WERE intended to be photorealistic. You'll see a big difference between the sets.
Old shit when I was in the phase:
Last edited by Pollywog; 09-07-2010 at 03:18 PM.
I never was into that HDR stuff. Always hated it, always.
Just use one RAW file and adjust the exposure ratings, saving each to a TIF 16bit, then merge. Use a minimum of 5 stops.Originally posted by Kloubek
I agree Pollywog. These shots were just my first experimentations with HDR - and in all four cases I put online, I never intended a single one of them to look photorealistic.
These ones I edited with CS5's HDR capabilities. There are three at home I will add later which I did by hand, and WERE intended to be photorealistic. You'll see a big difference between the sets.
You will have much better results
But a whole lot more noise generated by the process.Originally posted by 89coupe
You will have much better results
Originally posted by HeavyD
you know you are making the right decision if Toma opposes it.
Noise Ninja FTW.
Agreed. This way they align perfectly, and solves any issues if wind has blown trees, etc. between seperate exposure shots.Originally posted by 89coupe
Just use one RAW file and adjust the exposure ratings, saving each to a TIF 16bit, then merge. Use a minimum of 5 stops.
You will have much better results
Last edited by Pollywog; 09-07-2010 at 04:03 PM.
I didn't notice anyOriginally posted by Go4Long
But a whole lot more noise generated by the process.
Thanks - I'll try that. Still learning my camera too - sometimes it seems more complicated than my computers....Originally posted by 89coupe
Just use one RAW file and adjust the exposure ratings, saving each to a TIF 16bit, then merge. Use a minimum of 5 stops.
You will have much better results
Here's the two which used HDR, but were meant to look as I saw them in real life:
Last edited by Kloubek; 09-07-2010 at 05:19 PM.
^^^The only way to use HDR IMO. (i.e. you can't tell it's HDR.
Loving my GF1, so much lighter than my Nikon setup.
P1020595-Edit by ryankarr, on Flickr
P1020718-Edit by ryankarr, on Flickr
Love that one!Originally posted by blitz
[B]^^^The only way to use HDR IMO. (i.e. you can't tell it's HDR.
Loving my GF1, so much lighter than my Nikon setup.
P1020595-Edit by ryankarr, on Flickr
Edit: Did you add a soft-glow to that at all, or is that just natural? Btw - jealous about the GF1. I convinced my friend who was looking for a great camera yet more compact than a typical DSLR to purchase one, and its all I thought about as I carried around multiple pounds of camera gear around London.
Double edit: Looking back on rage2's shots on his GF1 in Chicago makes me want one sooo badly...
Triple edit: Anyone have any solid thoughts on the PEN vs GF1?
Quadruple edit: I just remembered, the digital viewfinder kills it for me.... I know the PEN has an optional optical finder, but does the GF1? Before I add another edit, do these 4/3's compacts take the photo the instant the shutter release is depressed, or are they like a typical point&shoot in this category?
Last edited by Pollywog; 09-07-2010 at 09:07 PM.
I don't know what soft-glow is, so I'm going with no. Just a B&W conversion and a red filter in Silver Efex pro.
The GF1 is awesome. Not as satisfying as an optical viewfinder on a DSLR, but damn is it small. EVF's don't interest me at all, but the screen is easy to see in all conditions.
I have the Oly 9-18mm, 14-42mm, 20mm 1.7 and 45-200mm. I bought all of those lenses and the GF1 with the cash from selling my 24mm PC-E...and I had cash left over.
The GF1 has a better interface (dedicated buttons for ISO, WB, etc, just like a good DSLR), a better screen and faster AF. The in body stabilization of the PEN series would be nice, but the GF1 is so much nicer to use. Plus their like US$700 now with the 20mm 1.7.
Their more like a DSLR in shutter lag than a point and shoot. I couldn't stand the lag on my LX3, and I also can't stand using a zoom rocker.
GF1 rocks!
One shot from A set I shot Sunday
I have a couple more uploaded on my flickr, but havent gone through them all yet.
lena lee by fotosbygordo, on Flickr