Creating HDR images from a single shot

[brettarthur]

I am need to create an HDR image from a single shot. The reason it is from a

single shot is because there is people in the photo. I have tried to create

three different images from and then merge to HDR by having them set to EV -2.0,

metered EV and EV +2.0. Any suggestions or techniques I could use?

 

Brett

[denisgermain]

HDR requires different exposures in Photoshop.

Your best bet is to use a tone mapping filter

[andrew_welch]

[obakesan]

Hi

 

so far I've tried importing the RAW file with over and under and combining in layers, but the results didn't seem to be substantially different to what I get using curves on the same image.

 

so I think to take advantage of this technique you need to have a wide dynamic range (like exceeding the capture) and 2 images.

 

given the range that can be had with a DSLR, as long as you're not blowing any of the channels (rg or b) in the RAW there is surprisingly large amounts of leeway in there.

 

IFF a channel appears to be blown, try fiddling with the colour space you're importing into (ProPhoto seems to solve my problems that occur when using sRGB as the destination space) and if only one channel is blowing then sometimes I can adjust the colour temp on import and bring that channel back.

 

naturally you'll need to then correct back in your editor, but at least you didn't wipe out data.

[garydem]

you will NOT create an HDR image from a single shot. even if you open it in a converter and develop it at 3 different exposures. the reason is that the original image does not have the large dynamic range to make an HDR. what you will end up with is a regular image that has been processed by hdr software. if that is what you want, fine, but it will not be an HDR final image.

 

to get and HDR final image you have to take the scene at diffeent exposures using shutter speed changes and the scene itself has to have a large dynamic range. this can be checked before the shots by using a spotmeter on the lightest and darkest areas to actually find out the dynamic range. for best results you should be looking at a range of 10stops or more. note finding a scene that actually has this 10stop range is harder than most people think.

[emre]

HDR stands for HIGH dynamic range--as in, higher than what you can capture. That is the point of the merge-to-HDR step. Unfortunately, you only see the result after the second step, which is tone mapping, and everyone equates it to "HDR" :(

[brettarthur]

i got ya. there is a photographer that does something he calls, "manual hdr" on his portraits. his site is <a a href="http://www.joeyl.com">www.joeyl.com</a>. go to commercial photography, then bands/musicians and look through some of the ones outside with the sky looking amazing. i think it's the band silverstein and also the ones of every time i die, they are dressed up like medieval characters or something with swords. i know it's not true HDR, its a fake "HDR" or something.

[Ed_Ingold]

You can't get an HDR-merge image from a single raw file. You can, however, use multiple adjustment layers with layer masks. In fact, masking works better with multiple image combinations than HDR-merge, and is more consistent than manual dodging and burning.

[eugene_scherba]

Can we have a "how to achieve this silly and overly cliched look" category on this forum,

please?

[phule]

HDR and HDR-like images are rare compared to sunsets and puppies. If you don't like it, ignore it.

[jacopo_brembati]

HDR try to compress the original image high tonal range into a LDR image. <br>

If the original dynamic range exceeds the dynamic range of the camera, yes in that case a single shot can't be used to capture all the dynamic of the scene. <br>

But if the scene contrast is not so high, a single raw shot,developed at different exposure level, may be enough. <br>

Have a look

<a href="http://www.photoresampling.com/hdr_eng.php"> here</a>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

My understanding of true HDR is to show more detail in brightly or darkly lit scenes that

doesn't come about through normal processing while retaining the normal look of the

scene.

 

This I believe this can be achieved in RAW in one shot by exposing to the right as close to

clipping highlites as much as possible.

 

The 35mm negative below shows the kind of curve required to coax more detail out of a

scanner induced overexposed scene.<div></div>

[eugene_scherba]

<p><i>HDR and HDR-like images are rare compared to sunsets and puppies.</i></p>

 

<p>My standards of rare are a bit higher than "less common than sunsets and

puppies."</p>

[jacopo_brembati]

Brett, <br>

the photos at the link are not HDR.

[phule]

[[My standards of rare are a bit higher than "less common than sunsets and puppies."]]

 

Apparently your standards are "if I don't like it, it shouldn't be allowed to exist"

[Tim_Lookingbill]

Has anyone checked out at the bottom this site's use of HDR? There's now a manual on the

subject.

</p>

 

<p>

Apparantly it was an ancient Hollywood secret in the rendering of movie negatives for

theatrical release. Sadly, from all the second rate prints I've been forced to watch on TV

and in theatres starting as far back as the '60's, I never knew or saw the advantage of the

"secret" until I saw the restored and remastered versions on cable channel TCM. My local

theatre still shows crap prints of new released movies.

</p>

 

<p>

<a href="http://www.hdrlabs.com/book/index.html">The HDRI HandBook</a>