HDR (High Dynamic Range) Photography

If you are not already familiar with HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography, you might want to look at the references below. I just discovered this recently, and I’m thinking this technique would would be very useful for storm images.

It basically involves creating a floating point representation of the scene from a bracketed set of shots.This representation contains a much greater dynamic range than can be represented in any one conventional digital image. Mapping techniques are then used to produce a viewable image that contains more detail across a wider range of illumination than can be captured in a single exposure. This technique can also be used to manipulate the image to look almost surreal, so that you can’t quite tell if it is real or not.

http://www.hdrsoft.com/examples.html - STUNNING examples
http://www.hdrsoft.com/images/more_examples/tm.html - more realistic type examples from the same place. Look at the one at the bottom!
http://tutorialblog.org/hdr-tutorials-roundup/ - Tutorials & more examples. Look at 6th and 9th images. Others are more artistic and less realistic.
http://www.17things.com/hdr-photos/ Some more examples, even more artistic.
http://www.hdrsoft.com/index.html - PhotoMatrix software for doing this ~US$100

Steve

Nice one Steve,
I wonder if you could get away with playing with the RAW images before converting to jpg and then Photoshop them together, adjusting the transparancy in some areas of the photo, to give the same effects?
May have a play later. :smiley:

Those are some incredible images! I’d like to try that with some of my lightning photography.

Thanks for sharing.

Corey

Something else to spend some time trying! I wonder if my digital camera can do bracketing or will I finally need to make the jump to DSLR?

If you were an SLR user back in the days of film, then you’ll really appreciate the upgrade to from a D to a DSLR. You can always bracket manually if it’s static scene (and you have manual control), but autobracketing is very cool.

Many of the non-entry level, but not DSLR, models will auto-bracket.
It is, after all, just some software to make it do that,
so it does not cost the camera maker extra to add it.

If you do get a new camera, especially if you want to use it for HDR,
you should consider one that has RAW output.
You can’t do true HDR with moving subjects, like the dancers,
but you can do pseudo-HDR by taking one RAW image
and extracting three jpegs from it at different virtual exposure values.

Steve

Olympus makes several DSLR models that auto-bracket both exposure and white balance but only +/- 1ev max during 3 exposures.

–Dave

If you can afford it (after all the problems you’ve been having with your PC’s Chris) then I can highly recommend the Canon EOS 400D.
It will produce RAW images in the manual modes and the software that comes with it will allow you to play with RAW to give better quality effects for the likes of HDR than you will get after the image has been converted to jpg. You can set it to produce RAW & jpg if you want and it will store each image in both formats.

The cheapest place I found in the UK for the camera was Amazon and being an EOS then extra lenses aren’t really a problem either as they are available second hand.

My first attempts with the camera at photographing the Northern Lights:

That’s the Rebel XTi here, successor to the Rebel XT/350D that I have, it’s a great camera.

That’s the one. We can still get the 350D new over here but it’s only

I’m not sure I care too much about the extra pixels, but I would definitely pay the extra for the self cleaning sensor system.

If you are handy you can make you own remote for a few $.

Canon AE-1 for-the-win! Wait… nevermind. :lol:

Corey

Nothing wrong with that, I used my Pentax P30T for the night shots, until I got the EOS 400D.
It must be around 25 years old now and still produces good quality photos, plus I have lenses upto 500mm (1000mm if I add the 2x converter) for it. If only I could find a Pentax K to EOS converter! :smiley:

Digital Cameras must be one of the best inventions ever. I was in a camera shop last week and the guy let me have a go with the EOS 400D. Its very light and small for an SLR. Every shop or place you go everyone seems to recommend this camera. By the time I have saved up the next model will be out :roll:

I know a lot of people like the Canon range. However, I’ve got a very nice Minolta Dynax/Maxuum 800si with a decent set of lenses, so I’m torn between going for the Sony Alpha A100 which would allow me to re-use some of the lenses until I can replace them with an equivalent set of ‘digital’ lenses, and going for a brand change. The problem is that if I go for a brand change, I’m effectively writing off my Minolta kit because being film based I’d probably have to pay someone to take it away. There’s a fair bit of money sunk into the film kit so it doesn’t feel right to sell it off dirt cheap.

One of the really impressive things about the canon is the battery life between charges. After my nikon that ate sets of 4 x AA’s like candy it’s just amazing for such a sophisticated camera 8O

Another amazing thing is that when I first started looking at the 10MP DSLRs (which can’t be that long ago) I calculated I’d need to spend about

I’d go with that Niko, even with the exposures of upto 1 minute that I use I can still get a good load of photos before the battery start to show a drain.

Chris,
I was in the same boat as you, I had a load of Pentax lenes and two good ones for my other 35mm, a Sigma SA7.
I could have gone with the Sigma SD10 and reused the lenes but the SD10 is a bit old hat now and still cost more than the EOS400D. The Pentax lenses would need an adaptor for which ever digital camera I went for.
So I bit the bullet and went for the best I could afford and got a twin lens pack with the body. I now have a 28-70mm & 80-300mm zoom lenses for it.
The Sigma I’m going to sell as it’s a new(ish) camera but the Pentax I’ll keep as it still comes in handy with the 400mm tele & 500mm mirror that it’s got. :wink:

From what I’ve read of the Sony A100 it sounds like a very good camera, so that’s what sort of tempts me. I can probably get the birthday fairy to fund a DSLR + single lens kit, plus the other essential optional extras like memory card(s), but I don’t think the BF will stretch to a two lens kit. So being able to reuse my older lenses (and the lenses I have are fully compatible with the A100…just without the digital anti-shake stuff) makes sense.

What’s put me off so far is that the A100 is Sony’s first foray into the DSLR market after buying Minolta and I don’t want to end up buying the only DSLR that Sony ever made. I’m sure they will develop other models that will help support a compatible lens market, but they’re being pretty slow releasing new models.

Budgie, I was just going to ask you if you got it with the lens, or just got the body, as I have seen that a lot of people have criticised the lens that comes with it.

Looks like it best to get just the body and than decide what lens to go with it. Would you have to go to a specialised shop to do it that way?

Chris, i suspect the Sony uses it own memory sticks too.

edit… Found a place that just sells the body, but only