What is Reddit's opinion of Photomatix?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

Canon Powershot SD790 IS (point and shoot camera), used CHDK custom firmware to take exposure bracketed shots, took 5 pics starting at -2 exp to +2 Exp, then ran the 5 shots through a program called Photomatix. The program has a bunch of presets for image processing and I liked this one the best.

The composure looks good, however the hdr needs some help.

There is an extremely evident 'halo' effect anywhere the sky touches something other than a border of the picture.

There are other bits too, like the sky not being blue or the underexposed wooden structure.

I bet this could all be solved with the use of Photomatix and some good plugins in photoshop. I'd suggest looking for anything Topaz Labs that suits your fancy, as well as Nik Software

Also, how many exposures did you use to make this picture, and at what stop between the pictures? That can make a difference as well.

If you're gonna shoot it without additional lighting then do this:

• Set your camera to aperture priority; f.8 or f.11
• Use a tripod (if you have any image stabilization on your lens turn it OFF)
• Bracket -2 under and +2 over. Every fucking shot.
• Don't shoot in harsh light. Wait until evening or take it to the shade.
• When you're done with the shoot use Photomatix to exposure blend. Do NOT use HDR. Use minimal settings to bring out details without turning it into a neon catastrophe.
• Burn ground / Dodge wheels in photoshop, add some contrast, possibly add a sky.

Done.

Like so many things, it's not really which tools that matter so much, it's how you use the tools.

Photomatix has been around a long time, and is the choice of many pros. You can set it to do subtle exposure fusion, crazy wacky over-the-top HDR, or anything in-between. If you think Photomatix can't do subtle HDR well, you are working under a misconception.

Here's a blog post by Lewis Kemper on the subject.

> easiest way to blend bracketed exposures

I use the merge to 32 bit plugin for lightroom, which is super easy, although I use it for landscapes (I'm not a real estate photographer).

> I'm about to start real estate photography full time with almost no training

You're braver than I am, I'll give you that much.

I didn't touch saturation.

Instead I applied tone-mapping with Photomatix, adjusted levels, applied unsharp filter, and finally rotated and cropped the shot. These tweaks make the details easier to pick out.

Try bracketing - 3 exposures and then combine them together. This is sometimes called HDR (High Dynamic Range). Here are a couple of links that will get you started in what it is and how to do it. Actually it is pretty easy and straight forward. Your Kx will do it just fine - with a 3 frame bracket. Look up in the manual for bracketing.

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/hdr-tutorial/

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/hdr-plea.shtml

http://www.hdrsoft.com/

Not really "today". these pictures are famous and quite very old now... at minimum 4 or 5 years. Also, they're HDR pictures, and if they can appear spectacular for people not used to HDR, they quite look horrible for the rest of us : very poor Photomatix execution with all sliders set to the max. It's painful to my eyes.

A classic photoshoot of Tchernobyl is spectacular in itself. HDR just ruins everything. Photomatix and bad practices are to blame : http://www.hdrsoft.com/

Photomatix is what I've been using since Day 1.

I'm nearing my 800th home, and my personal setup for work is as follows:

I use a tweaked version of the Interior 2 preset.

 

<x:xmpmeta xmlns:x='adobe:ns:meta/'> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf='http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'>

<rdf:Description rdf:about='' xmlns:pmtm='http://www.hdrsoft.com/photomatix_settings01'> <pmtm:Version>5.0</pmtm:Version> <pmtm:Method>Fusion/Real-Estate</pmtm:Method> <pmtm:DepthHighlights>0.0</pmtm:DepthHighlights> <pmtm:Highlights>-10.0</pmtm:Highlights> <pmtm:Shadows>5.0</pmtm:Shadows> <pmtm:LocalContrast>5.0</pmtm:LocalContrast> <pmtm:Saturation>1.5</pmtm:Saturation> <pmtm:IsPano360>No </pmtm:IsPano360> </rdf:Description>

</rdf:RDF> </x:xmpmeta>

&nbsp;

Outside photos are shot using 3 brackets at 2 EV.

Inside photos are shot at 5@2 for shots with windows and 3@3 for no windows.

Lightroom has an amazing HDR merge. It combines the brackets into a single RAW file (if you shot in RAW). It's fantastic.

If you're looking for something like what Trey does then you can stick with his custom software and likely achieve great success but I personally don't like how any of his photos look.

http://www.stuckincustoms.com/aurora-hdr-software-for-mac/

He makes more money with his photos than I do so I guess by one definition he's right.

I know a lot of people who use Photomatix as well and love it. http://www.hdrsoft.com/

FWIW, Photomatix is associated with garish HDR, but actually it has both HDR/Tonemapping and Exposure Fusion. You're essentially doing the latter by hand.

As far as HDR is concerned, I prefer Photomatix. I haven't used it in a while (HDR is not something I do frequently), but IIRC it has more control over the HDR processing than does Photoshop.

There are also plugins available for both Ps and Lr, but the Pro version gives you the absolute most control. There are also demos for all of their products (plug-ins and standalone software) here. Doesn't hurt to give it a try.

He uses an application called Photomatrix that automatically removes ghosting, applies smoothing, adjusts the lighting, etc. Any of this could amount to what you're describing.

--kumquat

Photomatix

The process of HDR photography can be difficult though. True HDR pictures are taken over three different bracketed exposures... This picture was one RAW, converted to 3 exposures in Adobe Lightroom, then processed in Photomatix.

This particular picture was done in HDR, but often I do a LAB color boost with levels in both color channels.

>1. Open Image: (Use 16 bit) In Photoshop and duplicate the image (not just the layer) >2. Choose>Image>Mode>LAB Color >3. Open New Levels Adjustment Layer >4. Select “a” Channel, Shift End point Sliders Uniformly (Shift, up and down >arrows, desired units) >5. Repeat For “b” Channel moving the sliders exactly as you moved them in the a channel. This will add color saturation without blowing out detail. >6. Play with sliders but usually 20 points from both ends is best. When Happy Click “O.K” >7. Change the mode back to RGB and move this duplicate back into your original as a layer.
>8. If the reds or the blues have gone too far double click on the layer and bring up layer styles and use blend if sliders. Or just adjust the opacity of the LAB layer.

Some times I also use Topaz Labs Detail filter which can adjust various color luminosities without messing with saturation.

Well, hopefully your desire to learn will expand as you expand the definition of "get the job done".

HDR Photography's pretty straightforward, but you'll need some software to get everything together. I use a tonemapping plugin for Photoshop, but if you're trying BARE MINIMUM, the company that makes my plugin also has some standalone software.

Now, for BARE minimum, just feed your photos as-is into the software and fiddle with the settings. Your result will probably resemble some of the crappier HDR stuff you've seen, since the levels will all be punched up.

If you actually want REAL HDR shots, you're gonna need to take multiple pictures of your source with different exposure settings, then composite them (again, in some sort of software). IDEALLY, your camera may have some sort of "bracketing" option that will quickly take several pictures in succession with differing exposure levels.

That tell you what you need to know? I'm a bit wary of your "I have no desire to learn" bit, because you WILL need to get your hands dirty if you want nice results, but hopefully I've explained enough to get things runnin' for ya.

EDIT: For your specific situation, you can probably set up a batch with some default settings and get an "HDR" kinda look from one source image. Should be reasonably easy to automate (although won't look anywhere near as nice as a true HDR image).

You can get a program called Photomatix that will take 3 pictures of the same thing at a different exposure and mix them together. With the tone mapping, you can then adjust the strength of the HDR effect to your liking with the sliders. I think that's the easiest way.

Here are a few pictures I've taken with this process. I don't think they look cartoonish, but the colors do pop more and some look better exposed than if I had just taken one picture.

I use the Photomatix Pro from HDRSoft and have been very satisfied. If I don't have it on whatever system I am working from, then I will use either Lightroom's HDR or export to Photoshop HDR.

You can use multiple images set at different EV's to make one HDR that should solve your problem.

So if your shadows are at -3 and your highlights are at 3

Eg. Take a bracketed shot 3 bracketed at -3 -2 -1 then another 3 bracketed shots at 1 2 3.

When you're done bring your 6 images into your HDR processing app and process it.

http://www.hdrsoft.com is pretty good

I still use Photoshop for my hand-held focus stacking, since Helicon wants nicely aligned images (and even in a consistent ordering!). In PS I tend to use Auto Align layers and Auto Merge layers as a first pass, then fix up the inevitable fuckups by manually transforming and blending layers on top of that.

Helicon has competitors that are worth a look too, I think the main one is Zerene Stacker.

If you like shooting HDR, I think that HDRsoft's merge to 32-bit plugin for Lightroom is the bee's knees. It merges your bracketed exposures together into one 32-bit TIFF, which you can then treat as a super high dynamic range photograph in Lightroom. This allows you to realistically simulate GND filters on top to bring the DR down to suitable levels, without going for the super-high-clarity "HDR look". Photoshop has exactly the same capability, but I like the plugin's workflow better, and in certain cases it is better at removing ghosts and blending exposures that are close to clipping.

Is there a general guideline that's recommended for bracketing if you want to use the fusion function?

On this page it says to try to merge fewer images, especially if they aren't adding much dynamic range.

What do you use (in general)? 3 shots, with +/- 2EV?

Thanks. For the most part, I use Adobe Lightroom. It's been perfect for minor photo corrections and editing, plus I like that it has a few build-in plug-ins. I can drag and drop photos from within LR, into the Flickr folder and publish. Nice and easy.

There are tons of videos and books on how to learn certain techniques. If I wanted an HDR photo, I'd take the 3 bracketed photos and merge them in photomatrix. Sometimes the merge comes out looking like crap or too fake for my tastes.

I learned that I have to go out often, to help retain everything that I learned. Slowly learn the basics and just keep adding in new techniques. For me it's about having fun while on a photo hunt, and then sharing it with a few friends.

A couple of ideas: One would be to take two exposures and composite them (Photoshop). Another would be to use a graduated neutral density filter like this one. I have not used a filter like that but I know that's the principle they are intended for. That moon is probably several stops brighter than the ocean and I don't know if they make graduated ND filters that can handle that.

I like desitroll's suggestion of blocking the lens with an opaque card. (reminds me of dodging paper under the enlarger, ya, get offa my lawn) You can keep the card in motion to get a feathered edge along the horizon. If you were to try this you might get the exposure right for the moon first so you can see detail with a 1 second exposure, adjusting aperture and ISO to get that right. Then figure out the ocean's exposure, say it's 20 sec or so since aperture and ISO are stopped down for the moon. Snap the pic in bulb mode, after 1 second use the card and expose the ocean for the remainder of the time. I might be totally off on the times but I hope you get the idea.

I was recently compositing a couple of exposures in Photoshop, one for the foreground and another for the sky, and it's hard to get the horizon right. I don't want to manipulate the photo too much or it looks... manipulated. Here's the picture I am working on, fireflies and moonrise, along with the two original pics. I am a beginner and am learning how to use layer mask in Photoshop to make a blended transition. The layer mask uses shades of gray to determine what shows through. Any suggestions are appreciated.

Another idea would be to bracket the exposure, one for the moon, another for the sky, another couple for the ocean and let an HDR program sort it out.

Lightroom does not have a way to blend multiple photos, so you'll need another piece of software that can. Photoshop can do it, or you can get dedicated software like Photomatix by HDRSoft (http://www.hdrsoft.com/).

If you shoot RAW, though, Lightroom lets you work with the full dynamic range that your sensor captured. You can recover blown highlights and bring out shadow detail that way without taking multiple exposures. That gives me all the extra dynamic range I need in most cases. Lightroom 4 is a big upgrade for natural-looking shadow and highlight recovery.

It's good work, but you have a hint of plastic-ey unreality. I think that most people would find a more natural appearance to be more inviting. Pretty much everyone who does HDR wrestles with this.

I really like Photoshop CS5's merge to HDR. I like Photomatix Pro for having tons more control over your image, and Topaz Adjust for quick adjustments on a single image.

I'll bet that Topaz Adjust and/or Photomatix could save you a lot of time.

I often copy my image to a top layer, look for the effect I'm after in Topaz, and then turn the opacity on the Topaz-edited layer down to zero, and slowly bring it up until I get a very subtle amount of what I want. Very often, less is more.

Here is a link to the Photomatix Pro program that he uses in the video. Not sure if you use Windows or Mac, so here's both.

Seriously? That's your reasoning now? 'My thinking is clear to me so it's should be clear to you'? I really wish communication worked like that. Sadly it does not. :(

Here's another link for you: http://www.hdrsoft.com/resources/dri.html#hdri This question and the one below it.

If that link, on top everything else I've said doesn't convince you, then I'm sorry for your ignorance.

I bracketed the shot in my camera. The first I took properly exposed and then one at +2 EV and one -2 EV.

Then I combined all three exposures in photomatix pro 4.0. Then I brought that single image from photomatix into photoshop, used Color Efex Pro 3.0, then adjusted the color in LAB color mode, then used noiseware to get rid of a lot of the noise that was created from all the processing.

Anyone intrested in trying this out should look into getting Photomatix: http://www.hdrsoft.com/ I was able to get it 75% off since I'm enrolled for photography at AIO, here's a link with more info: http://www.hdrsoft.com/order/academic.html