What happens in the HDR universe if I shoot one Raw file and then copy it twice...then adjust the "exposure" settings on each. Put one at -1, one at 0, and one at +1.
Use the three raw files in photomatix to combine. Will the effect be the same or near the same as shooting at -1, 0, 1 ?
You can't adjust a RAW file itself, once you edit it a new file is created storing the adjustments you made.
So creating 3 raws and adjusting the settings would still be 3 identical RAW's in photomatix.
You could create a number of JPG's from a single RAW at different exposures and then use those in Photomatix but i'm not sure if there is any benefit doing this over just opening the single RAW in photomatix directly?
What happens in the HDR universe if I shoot one Raw file and then copy it twice...then adjust the "exposure" settings on each. Put one at -1, one at 0, and one at +1.
Use the three raw files in photomatix to combine. Will the effect be the same or near the same as shooting at -1, 0, 1 ?
Thanks,
Kenskid
A lot of people do that with good results. The only thing you lose compared to taking three separate shots is you would be able to further adjust the -1 and +1 RAW shots to give even more dynamic range.
It will not be the same as shooting @ -1, 0, +1 because those extra two stops won't be there.
I know many here will adjust the exposure on a single RAW and then run it through Photomatix and get good results. I tried that but didn't see much difference over just using the original RAW.
Now this....when I shoot three raw at -1, 0 , +1 and then go into each raw and adjust further...says take the -1 down to -1 and the +1 up to +2 would that be the same as having taken the original files at -2, 0, +2 as far as photomatix is concerned?
when I shoot three raw at -1, 0 , +1 and then go into each raw and adjust further...says take the -1 down to -1 and the +1 up to +2 would that be the same as having taken the original files at -2, 0, +2 as far as photomatix is concerned?
The point of making an HDR is to obtain a wider dynamic range than what your camera is able to give you with just one single shot.
You will get a wider dynamic range by combining three images with different exposure settings. If you for instance take a picture towards the sun you will burn out the brightest areas and maybe not at all expose the shaded areas. Once an area is totally burned out (white) or totally black you will never be able to recover those pixels no matter how many times you change the exposure settings in the .RAW file. But if you could take three images you would expose one for the sun, one for the shades and for the mid tones.
Hope this helps
EDIT: so the answer to your question is no, it will not be the same.
I tend to shoot HDR at +/- 2 stops. It seems to suit the landscape style I do. It doesn't work for everything though. Many times I wind up using only 2 of the exposures. I also blend the shots manually most times instead of using photomatix.
I second that DrAchoo. But the 5D also has a great dynamic range.
I also find that exposure bracketing is more efficient when taking shots with a higher ISO since you will then decrease the dynamic range. As far as I recall, the 5D (amongst other cameras) has it's widest dynamic range at ISO 200. That is at least where I kept mine by default - whether it was right or not :)
Let me ask this....why do most cameras come with only 3 frames of bracket? I know that bracketing was originally designed to "get the best shot" using three but now that this HDR thing has caught on, you would think the cams would come with 6+ brackets.
Let me ask this....why do most cameras come with only 3 frames of bracket? I know that bracketing was originally designed to "get the best shot" using three but now that this HDR thing has caught on, you would think the cams would come with 6+ brackets.
Interesting, though I think my hard drive would suffer 6x more than it already does.
I often use this method and create 5 exposures 1 stop apart from the single raw file, often the only way for moving subjects, and most times it works pretty well. I often use it to fix the sky in a shot and merge them manually using layer masks
I second that DrAchoo. But the 5D also has a great dynamic range.
I also find that exposure bracketing is more efficient when taking shots with a higher ISO since you will then decrease the dynamic range. As far as I recall, the 5D (amongst other cameras) has it's widest dynamic range at ISO 200. That is at least where I kept mine by default - whether it was right or not :)
I never heard before that dynamic range changes at different ISOs, although I can't imagine it being much. Do you have a source for this? It's not that I don't believe you, I just want to learn more about it.
One thing about bracketing at higher ISO if you the noise isn't too much is that moving objects such as clouds don't move as much.
Let me ask this....why do most cameras come with only 3 frames of bracket? I know that bracketing was originally designed to "get the best shot" using three but now that this HDR thing has caught on, you would think the cams would come with 6+ brackets.
I would love to have more myself, but I'm guessing it's just a software issue. I believe at least one of the Canon pro cameras has much greater bracketing, although I'm not sure which one. I'm tempted to take the laptop out in the field one day and try bracketing more than 3 but that sure would be a pain.
I shoot one raw and process +1 and -1 often with great results. you just shoot a slightly darker image than you normally would so you dont have to bump the shadows too high
