AS wrote:
> Then you should be all set. I didnt realize that you had CS3. There are HDR
> tutorials all over the net.
>
> I do agree that HDR can be overdone, however it can also be beneficial in
> bringing out details, particularly in areas which are very dark.
>
It seems to me that HDR software is being used to do things far beyond
the simple use of combining exposures to bring a broader dynamic range
into images. As one who has been known to manipulate images beyond any
natural look for "artistic" effect - i.e. to please me - I have no
objection to such use. But I do think the use of the same acronym for
both uses is confusing.
It seems some folks think HDR is a synonym for hopping it up until it
hurts ones eyeballs. ;-)
> I took the family to Pittsburgh for the weekend. Came back with some decent
> photos. There are a couple of HDR's, including a BW which I converted from an
> HDR image.
>
> The photos of the animals are NON-hdr but tonemapped using Photomatix:
>
> http://flickr.com/photos/4love/
>
I don't know whether it is the HDR software or some other editing, but
the building images have really impressive sharpening halos. The angles
and whatever else was done are fine, but I really dislike the halos.
Here is a sloppy effort to remove them after the fact and on a tiny
image, but should show what I am talking about. Easy enough to avoid in
the first place.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/AliShah/Diplo.htm>
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|