![]() Second is sort of a variation on the first where I want to avoid HDR artifacts (halos, noise, etc). There are many great HDR software packages, but I prefer the look and feel I get from Photomatix. First is when the dynamic range of the image is varying considerably in numerous small parts of the image (such as can often happen with a cityscape image), I find that HDR can be a simpler approach than trying to manually blend exposures with luminosity masks (as the masks get more complex when the dynamic range varies considerably in numerous parts of the image). There are three primary scenarios where I use HDR. So is one technique better than the other? Like a lot of things, the answer is “it depends”. But luminosity masking doesn’t always result in beautiful images and isn’t necessarily as challenging as it can seem. On the flip side, luminosity masking tends to be associated with both beautiful images and something approaching quantum physics. But with some judicious use, HDR can create some beautiful images. Throw a couple of exposures at an algorithm, turn a few knobs, crank it up to 11, and out comes… something garish. Update: Please also see 7 unique ways that luminosity masks can enhance your image beyond increasing dynamic range.įew words seem to polarize photographers more than HDR.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |