PDA

View Full Version : Photomatix?


Glyn R
7th January 2008, 04:08 PM
I have tried Photomatix and I find the images flat and uninteresting, there is a loss of sharpness and increase in background patterning which I find objectionable. I think better results can be obtained by image blending with layers where you can be totally selective. I wonder if I am alone in this. I just looked at the Perfectportrait website which prompted me to start this thread.:confused:

Garrie
7th January 2008, 04:45 PM
Hi Glen,

Are you using a single raw and then using Photomatix to psuedo a hdr image?

Glyn R
7th January 2008, 04:48 PM
Hi Glen,

Are you using a single raw and then using Photomatix to psuedo a hdr image?

No 3 exposures. -1, +1, 0, taken from Raw.

Garrie
7th January 2008, 04:57 PM
Funky, I've noticed a lot of noise can be introduced by psuedo 1 raw file.

When I shot for HDR/Tone mapping (most of the time) I normally use jpgs and only notice noise on the longer exposures. My camera is normally set to SHQ+RAW, I bin the under and overexposed RAW and keep the correctly exposed one, leaving me with 4 files in total (3 jpgs and 1 raw)

For good high dynamic range its best to use 0, -2, +2, although I have used the camera AEB to shoot 3 files with 0, -1, +1.

Still this doesn't explain the noise issue. I'll have a play when I get home tonight.

Cheers
Garrie

Garrie
7th January 2008, 05:00 PM
No 3 exposures. -1, +1, 0, taken from Raw.

Just re-read that, being a bit slow today (first day back at work) am I right in saying you shot 1 RAW and then post process it to produce the 3 exposures in which to load into Photomatix?

Glyn R
7th January 2008, 05:01 PM
This is the difference I have found. Same base files.
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/509/P9124643And2More_tonemapped.jpg
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/509/P9124642_edited-1.jpg

Glyn R
7th January 2008, 05:03 PM
Just re-read that, being a bit slow today (first day back at work) am I right in saying you shot 1 RAW and then post process it to produce the 3 exposures in which to load into Photomatix?

No I shot 3 RAW +1, -1, 0. converted to tiff and used in Photomatix Pro. I just got Photography Monthly Mag . The HDR on the cover leaves me cold. Must be me!

Garrie
7th January 2008, 05:07 PM
hmm I see what you mean, any chance you could email me the base files so I can have a play, if you don't mind me be so cheeky? (garrie@daydesigns.co.uk)

The below picture was tonemapped in photomatix and doesn't appear imho that flat and uninteresting. (taken by my partner) I could forward you the HDR mapping settings file if you like?

http://www.onemileahead.co.uk/s15anw/wheel/P106254423.jpg

Glyn R
7th January 2008, 05:13 PM
Your image is very good but is obviously HDR. Loses some sparkle for me. I started this thread after looking a Professional Portrait Pro. I thought all the portraits on their website looked like plastic people. Other people like them I think the tonemapped images look unreal to me. Perhaps I will try +2,-2, 0.

Garrie
7th January 2008, 05:23 PM
Fair enough, I really like tone mapped images yet I'm the first to admit I like to overcook them sometimes and enjoy the "gritty" tone I can get, granted it doesn't work for all shots.

I personally think your tonemapped image via photomatix could be worked on to produce a more pleasing result.

I've not taken a look at Professional Portrait Pro as protrait ain't really my thing, one mans meat is anothers poison http://www.migweb.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/beer.gif

All the best
Garrie

Glyn R
7th January 2008, 05:54 PM
I think HDR has been promoted as some kind of wonder solution to the limitation of Digital. In its place it is a useful tool but not the only one which seems to be getting forgotten. I sent you the images. Feel free to post the result. It is only a record image.

Glyn R
7th January 2008, 10:12 PM
This is a bit better .
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/509/P9124643_1_2_tonemapped.jpg

Garrie
7th January 2008, 10:26 PM
I'm liking that..

Here is my attempt

http://www.onemileahead.co.uk/myattempt.jpg

Garrie
7th January 2008, 10:36 PM
here is my gritty attempt, not to too many peoples liking at all but its good for explores and industrial scenes.. You'll hate it no doubt but its what makes us different :)

http://www.onemileahead.co.uk/grit.jpg
Didn't straighten the image in the above shot

Noticed 1 thing in the EXIF data, the F stop, I wouldn't have had the lens so fully open but thats personal choice I guess :)

All the best
Garrie

Glyn R
7th January 2008, 11:06 PM
Would be OK for an industrial scene, I still prefer my effort in PS layers overall. I can see where it would have an application but for effect. I use Neat Image for some High ISO shots they can look very bland sometimes. Comes back to horses for courses I suppose. Thanks for your input.

crimbo
15th January 2008, 06:59 PM
AFAIK Photomatix uses DCraw to decode the raw file. I have noticed the increased noise with the tone mapper.
A solution, for me, to reduce this is to use DCraw with the -k -4 -T switches to decode the file to a linear Tiff that is then used in Photomatix

Glyn R
15th January 2008, 09:32 PM
I have tried generating tiffs in Lightroom but I still find the patterning in the HDR. I have to say the more HDr files I see generated by software the less I like them. I think the control you can get by using blended layers gives much more attractive images without the patterning I found in Photomatix. I must post some more of my efforts :)

alert_bri
16th January 2008, 09:46 AM
Hi Glyn, would you mind sending me the 3 RAW files? I'd like to show what LightZone can do on a single image (I'll just select the best out of the three RAW files as the base image and work with that).

LightZone gives me the kind of control many people use CS3 with blended layers to achieve, but with sharper results.

Kind Regards

Brian

p.s. my e-mail address is brian dot mosley at ukphotosafari dot org