[Jocko]

This photograph is an HDR image from one raw file. I used Adobe Camera Raw to produce three images, each one stop apart, and combined them with Nik HDR Efex Pro 2, to produce the image you see here. What do you think?

   
Original image, Nikon D80, 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR lens, 1/320 sec, f10, ISO 200, 450mm lens equivalent.

[EnglishBob]

Looks a little hot on my screens, though nice and natural tones and textures throughout.

[EdMak]

Close John, would like to see a "Normal" edit on the original, for comparison. Cheers. Ed.

[Jocko]

Looks a little hot on my screens, though nice and natural tones and textures throughout.

It didn't look like that on my screen when I Exported it from Lightroom, but I thought the same once posted here. Maybe I should change my Lightroom background to white, to more replicate how they will look on Shuttertalk.

[Jocko]

Ed.
Side by side, the HDR.
   
   
and from the original file.

As you can see, although the original is not burnt out, there is not enough dynamic range to fully justify the detail in the white plumage.

[MrB]

It is a pleasant scene, John, nicely composed and good colours. In addition to the highlights of the birds, the first has a bit more local contrast and colour saturation.

As you can see, although the original is not burnt out, there is not enough dynamic range to fully justify the detail in the white plumage.

The very fact that you have used the three images from a single raw file to produce a final image in HDR software, indicates that all the necessary highlight detail must have been recorded in the single captured raw file. As far as I am aware, there is no software method that can produce highlight details from none. HDR software is usually for blending two (or more) different exposures, precisely because the dynamic range of the scene exceeds what it is possible to capture in a single shot.

There is therefore no need to use HDR software techniques in this sort of example, in order to display the dynamic range of the scene in the final image. It could have been achieved by conventional post-processing methods applied to a single image in software such as PS, Elements, PaintShop, etc., to recover the highlights. But, obviously, the decision regarding how to capture and process images is entirely up to the photographer. Ed: 'To each is own!'.

Cheers.
Philip

[Jocko]

Tried it in Photoshop. I converted it using ACR 5 then processed it using Photoshop CS2. I then used Nik Software for final finishing.

   

I am not as happy with the result as I was with the HDR image, plus it took me about three times as long. Finding CS4 interface a bit alien, hence the reason I went back to CS2. CS2 does everything I know how to use, and I am comfortable with it.

[EdMak]

This was done in CS4, whatever they are standing on does not like sharpening!

Is Camera Raw , so good that it can emulate two different exposures, identical to what the camera would do.

Worth a side by side comparison, anybody? Cheers. Ed.

[Jocko]

whatever they are standing on does not like sharpening!

Is Camera Raw , so good that it can emulate two different exposures, identical to what the camera would do.

What you see when you sharpen is the tiny crustaceans you find all along this shore. All the rocks, and such, are covered with them. They are about 3mm in diameter shells.

Camera Raw is probably every bit as good as a digital camera in determining exposure. After all, they are both just juggling zeros and ones!

[MrB]

Any image manipulating software used to edit one image captured by the camera (or a scanner) will be able to emulate any different exposure, usually just by moving the parameter sliders around, but with the following limitations. What software cannot do is to create the details in shadows and/or highlights (i.e. the different dark or light tones that we see as details) if they were recorded in the out-of-camera file as pure black (RGB 0,0,0) and pure white (RGB 255,255,255 in 8-bit JPEG, or 65535, etc. in 16-bit raw or TIFF).

That is why HDR software is usually used with at least 2 different camera-exposed shots. Taking the minimum of two, one of them would have more exposure, so that the shadow areas are recorded as a range of distinguishable dark tones; similarly, the other would have less exposure, so that the highlight areas are recorded as a range of light tones. The clever HDR software then combines them so that the final image has details in both shadow and highlight areas, instead of just black or white, together with a good range of mid-tone details from the two images.

Cheers.
Philip

[Jocko]

Yes. When working with one image it is up to the photographer, doing the processing, to glean the highlight and shadow detail by slider manipulation, of the files created from the original. It is better if you have multiple exposures to begin with, though.