- 1,198
Any tips on shooting for a HDR image?
The Photography Thread
- Thread starter CDailey
- 3,605 comments
- 170,976 views
- Status
- 10,837
- Belgium
- bramturismo
Any comments on my last update? 👍
F1GTR, any idea how the shutter speed on the Canon G-series works? The G9 seems a PITA with shutter speed, sometimes it works, sometimes not, is there a way to activate it or to set it up to a certain speed?
F1GTR, any idea how the shutter speed on the Canon G-series works? The G9 seems a PITA with shutter speed, sometimes it works, sometimes not, is there a way to activate it or to set it up to a certain speed?
- 3,014
Thanks tait, HDR (although just a fake photoshop action) isnt really my thing anyway, i was just curious about it thats all, i might have a tinker around with the 2nd one to see if i can find a happy medium outside of HDR.
- 5,677
The only thing I use HDR for is to get the full dynamic range I wouldn't be able to get otherwise but I dont like the overprocessed look. So I mess with every single option in photomatix until I get it all looking natural. I also only usually use -1,0,+1 as i find for what I usually do it works best.
- 9,089
- Scotland
had a go at messing around with that HDR.
- 4,728
- ferrari_chris
I think you need a background further away.
- 9,089
- Scotland
yeah i dont think it worked too well
maybe because the paint isnt metallic?the colours seemed to come out alot better on the second one though were as with the first one it was trying to age it.
- 5,987
You're first year in photography and are already shooting? Did you take pictures in first semester too?
- 5,987
I don't know about second semester, but all of my first-year photography friends at OCAD didn't take any pictures at all first semester. It was all theory work where you're mixed in with all of the other fine arts kiddies.
- 5,677
quick shoot with a different look than what I normally shoot:
- 5,481
- Seattle, WA
- RykonZero
She looks emo. What's with those blue stockings?
- 5,677
GilesGuthrie
Staff Emeritus
- 11,038
- Edinburgh, UK
- CMDRTheDarkLord
Those are generally pretty cool skylineGTR_guy. I'll have another look at home on my calibrated monitor, but the skin tone in some of them is a bit orange, and I think some of your blacks are merging. But that could just be my rubbish work monitor.
- 5,677
yeah lighting wasnt all that great and I haven't had a chance to buy some strobes, so some was direct sunlight, others were flash, Haven't gotten a diffuser for my 580exII yet, i suppose i should though.
- 4,728
- ferrari_chris
👍
- 5,987
That's what an HDR shot should look like in my opinion. Maybe a tad overdone, but still looks different and cool.
What were you doing in California?
What were you doing in California?
- 12,486
- CCS
- GTP_Diego
I dl'ed a pic from California and applied the HDR filter to it
That last pic would've looked better if you were under your hoodie, Chaz... IMO
- 1,198
I've read " The Digital Photography Book" By Scott Kelby, and he says 2 stops above the stop you are at would the sharpest. He has an example, where if the stop was at 2.8 the sharpest stops would be two stops above it, which is 5.6 and 8. The thing is , I dont know how you figure out the stops, because if I'm at 3.5, i wouldnt just adjust my aperture to 2 clicks would I? From 3.5 to 4.5 right?
- 1,102
I'm confused. Sharpest compared to what? When is 5.6 sharper than 2.8? What context is he talking about? Is talking about depth of field, and that two stops above will make your image sharper (sharper in the sense that you will have a larger depth of field, having more in focus)?
- 3,014
No, sharper as in the subject in focus at the sharpest point will generally be sharper at f5.6-f11 than at that of the widest aperture of say f2.8.
Most prime lenses like my Pentax SMC-M f1.4 will be a fair bit less sharp (even when properly focused) at the widest aperture than at that 2 to 3 stops down. In turn going any further than that to f16 or f32 will again affect how sharp the pictures are. Generally speaking the sharpest aperture for most lenses will be between f5.6 and f11.
Or at least thats how i understand it, correct me if im wrong please!
Edit: Duhh im starting to talk about film lenses when the original question was about digital photos!
im not entirely sure what constitutes as a 'stop' with digital cameras either to be honest, there are so many different apertures compared to film lenses it gets a little confusing. Can anyone else help
Most prime lenses like my Pentax SMC-M f1.4 will be a fair bit less sharp (even when properly focused) at the widest aperture than at that 2 to 3 stops down. In turn going any further than that to f16 or f32 will again affect how sharp the pictures are. Generally speaking the sharpest aperture for most lenses will be between f5.6 and f11.
Or at least thats how i understand it, correct me if im wrong please!
Edit: Duhh im starting to talk about film lenses when the original question was about digital photos!
im not entirely sure what constitutes as a 'stop' with digital cameras either to be honest, there are so many different apertures compared to film lenses it gets a little confusing. Can anyone else help
- 1,102
I would be more worried about depth of field than the sharpness. The difference in sharp between a few stops will probably be minimal, or even barely existent at all. Depth of field though between a few stops is a major importance to take into account when you're talking about a two stops difference. I would worry about that way before I would worry about how sharp different stops are.
Just a note, bondy's right on the f5.6 - 11 being the prime area. Most digital lenses (unless you're a baller) have a hard time pushing past 16 or 22. Something to keep in mind.
Just a note, bondy's right on the f5.6 - 11 being the prime area. Most digital lenses (unless you're a baller) have a hard time pushing past 16 or 22. Something to keep in mind.
- Status
