Need some help with first bracketing/HDR attempt

<p>Hello! I recently was made aware of a location close to home that would be a great fall photo spot. Once I saw others' photos of the location, I decided I would love to make an HDR image. I know HDR is a common technique now but still, I wanted to try. I knew I would have to bracket exposures, which I have never done before, so I consulted my camera's manual on how to do it this morning before leaving for the location. (Nikon d7000) I found instructions online for using Photoshop to combine those bracketed exposures and create an HDR image. Here is what I came up with. The image looks exactly as I envisioned, except...the falling water has some extra coloration in it. Have I done something wrong? Can I fix this somehow? What could I do differently next time (which will be next Saturday if the weather and leaves hold out for me) to make this better?</p>

<p>I can also post the original images/exif if that helps.</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Renee</p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>What could I do differently next time (which will be next Saturday if the weather and leaves hold out for me) to make this better?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is not an HDR scene, so what you could do different and far easier would be to go back and shoot it again in the Raw format in a single shot setting exposure to preserve the highlights in the white water.</p>

<p>The image will appear dark in your Raw converter but that D7000 has quite a bit of dynamic range capture capability so there will be a ton of clean data to make it look as it should.</p>

<p>Just a suggestion but you might want to tone down the saturation levels. That sample has green leaves that are clipped in the red channel in sRGB, a space that can represent green leaves lit n overcast light without clipping channels.</p>

<p>I have problems judging saturation levels shooting nature and editing in post, so I have to walk away from the edit and come back to do a reality check.</p>

<p>Here's a recent shot I took in similar light in one single shot. The top is what I saw, the bottom is similar saturation level to what I'm seeing in your image sample.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>This would be considered an HDR scene similar to yours...</p>

<p>http://wallpaperspal.com/wp-content/uploads/Mountain-Waterfall-HDR-Wallpaper.jpg</p>

<p>Agree with Tim; there is no need for HDR in your shot. You only need HDR if the contrast range is too great to be captured in a single shot, and even then you need care as the result can look awful. A photo needs good blacks. If you can see into every shadow then in all likelihood the shot will look fake. Usually HDR can be considered if you must have highlight detail, say, in a distant mountain lit by full sun and also in a foreground in deep shadow, or in an interior that shows the view out the window and also detail in the interior itself. You can do quite a lot by boosting shadow detail in post processing, so actual HDR is often not necessary.</p>

Thank you both. Clearly I misunderstood what an HDR

image is. I did shoot this in RAW so I will revisit the files.

I still have much to learn.

 

Thanks,

Renee

<p>Hi Rene,<br>

I think you have gotten some pretty good answers here. To me the image looks way over saturated or tone mapped. I experimented with HDR for a couple of years but it never really worked for me. I guess it all depends on what your going after but to me HDR just looks too unnatural and plastic. Even HDR images that are processed very well still seem to have some unnatural element to my eye. I also shoot with a D7000 and find the dynamic range to be pretty healthy. I always process my RAW images with lightroom and usually have no problems correcting the shadows and highlights for a more realistic looking image. I would say that most situations are not suited for HDR anyway. At least in my experience I find it very seldom necessary and even then I'm usually able to suffice with a carefully exposed RAW file. I guess if your exclusively going for the so called proverbial HDR look then that might be a different story. Good luck and keep working at it. You will eventually figure out what works best for you.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

<p>Hi Renee,<br>

I certainly wouldn't discourage you from attempting to use an HDR workflow in similar situations in the future. Waterfall scenes are one of those cases that have the potential for an extreme range of light values to be recorded. It's hard to say what the exact range was on the day you shot it. I always shoot to be sure I capture the whole range in cases like this, using multiple exposures, but not using the HDR setting in my camera. It's the same argument as shooting in RAW. Delaying the final processing decisions allows you to try different settings and combinations to exactly arrive at the result you prefer.</p>

<p>To specifically address your question about the color artifacts in the highlights, I believe they are in fact due to the dynamic range being even greater than what your exposures and HDR settings could handle in the camera. I'm guessing even your shortest exposure still blew out a channel or two of the highlights. So when the HDR elves in the camera tried to assemble a final image, the were confused about what color the highlights should be.</p>

<p>I don't think you misunderstood what an "HDR image" is. In fact I don't care much for the terms "HDR image" or "HDR look". I prefer to think in terms of an "HDR workflow" and "grunge" for the look we sometimes see. By the time we see a final "image", it isn't technically a high dynamic range image anyway. That's the whole point -- to take a high dynamic range scene, and to use various workflow techniques to capture all the light values and compress them down into something we can view. Depending on our choices, we can end up with a normal looking photo, or something totally unnatural and surreal.</p>

<p>Keep at it Renee. Just sort through some of the suggestions here and see what works for you. </p>

<p>BTW Renee,<br>

That (over)saturation that you are seeing is something that happens a lot in an HDR workflow. That's another reason to delay the choice of settings until you are processing the scene in the computer. Then you can dial the saturation back to the way you like. In recent times, saturation is one of those things folks like to crank up as high as they can get away with. That exact point is hard to predict in advance.</p>

<p>Alan</p>

<p>Thank you all for your responses. I have learned from this, so I appreciate your assistance.</p>