[Pavel]

We all find ourselves in situation where the dynamic range exceeds the sensitivity range of the camera. HDR technique seems like an obvious solution and some people produce exceedingly good and even great photos using this technique. However there are also problems. Colour shifts, halos outlines are common, although many HDR hands seem to learn to avoid or minimize these pitfalls. Another problem is a lack of contrast and HDR photos or parts of these photos often seem lifeless and bleached out. I am also bothered by a frequent absence of shadows, which I consider very important visual clue and a tool to enhance the emotive component of photos.

My lack of skills with HDR led me to experiment with an alternative. I import the bracketed images (as in HDR) into PS as different layers. I adjust each layer to contribute a segment of the overall image using blending and the erasor tool. To my eyes, there are no artefacts noticeable, the shadows and contrast are preserved and to finalize one image may not take any longer than it does with HDR. Check my flicker site and identify the 2 to 3 photos where I used this and see if you can notice artefacts not caused by my sloppiness. I used this approach even for some high contrast, complex colour single (unbracketed) photos and it worked too.

Am I giving up on HDR? Absolutely not! I want to figure out when one approach is better than the other. I would say though that the cut and blend approach is simple and intuitive and worth trying out as an alternative to HDR at least in some situations.

Comments/views are very welcome
Pavel

[pendulum15]

A great way to get rid of that grey haze over some HDRs is to once it is tonemapped run it through color efex pro (tonal contrast), I use that on alot of my pictures (non HDR as well), and some it doesn't make a difference and others make me think my lens has fungus
Here's an example of a non-HDR shot run through it...
Before


After


I generally use it if any shot looks bland and lacking contrast....

[ADK_Jim]

A trick for removing that sort of haze/fog without buying a plug in is to use Unsharp Masking. In the filters dialog go to sharpen>unsharp masking. In the dialog that comes up start with settings of 15/60/0 (amount/radius/threshold). To decrease or increase the effect lower or raise the first setting (amount). Usual settings will be between 10 and 20. On rare occasions I have gone down to 5 or up to 30. Changing the other settings is generally not helpful in this trick.

ADK Jim

[Pavel]

Pendulum hello. I got some "color effex" filters with the Wacom Tablet and others with Epson R1900 printer. I like to use them sometimes, although I do not think they are color managed (they do not softproof the display) and so I ofen have to go and redo the adjustments using this tool. I love Nik for the wonderful selection tool and I wish they provided it separatelly and not just bundled with their software.

In terms of colour, a click using the middle dropper in the curves on white or supposedly colour-neutral part of the image usualy removes much of the haze. In terms of sharpening afterward, the trick that Jim described is very effective and it is quick. One of the fascinating thing about postprocessing is that there are so many ways.

I notice that Nik also increases local contrast and saturates colours quite heavily and that may well be usefull on some HDR photos. It is just that I bought the tablet and printer and went through a lot of ink and now I want to lay low financialy for a while. Thanks for a suggestion.

My big problem is tone mapping. The best description of how to that I found is in StuckInCustoms.com. I am not really good at this. Let me know if you do try the alternative on some photo. Pavel