11 replies to this topic

[geek-accountant]

So I was out today doing some "machine gun panos" and decided to try a hand held HDR. I am sure most of you guys have done this before, but I have always done my HDR on a tripod and to tell you the truth, that is how I will do most of them in the future. However, it was late afternoon and there was still plenty of sun, so shutter speed was not going to be a problem.

Here is the result (I intentionally over processed the image just a bit):

[pcdoc]

Very nice shot. Have not tried HDR yet but I will.

[geek-accountant]

HDR can become addictive. If you don't have HDR software, download Photomatix and you can use their trial version.

[awraynor]

Very good job. I have seen many HDR photos that end up looking non-lifelike, but
this photo looks great.

[vinylfreak]

So I was out today doing some "machine gun panos" and decided to try a hand held HDR. I am sure most of you guys have done this before, but I have always done my HDR on a tripod and to tell you the truth, that is how I will do most of them in the future. However, it was late afternoon and there was still plenty of sun, so shutter speed was not going to be a problem.

Here is the result (I intentionally over processed the image just a bit):

Great Shot! Mike!

You have peaked my interest!

[geek-accountant]

HDR is a lot of fun. What makes a good HDR scene is one with a high dynamic range. For example, in the shot above, there was no way to get details in the sky and details in the wall in front of me, or even in some of the buildings in one image. But by shooting a 3 shot bracket (1 image at -1 Stop, another a +1 Stop and another at normal exposure) you can expose the image for BOTH the highlights and the shadows by combining the images into 1 HDR image.

To be honest, the scene above really wasn't that bad without HDR and i normally look for something with even more dynamic range. Plus, other than the image above, all my HDR is done on a tripod. But as this shows, if you have decent light, you can do it without a tripod.

[ikon]

HDR is a lot of fun. What makes a good HDR scene is one with a high dynamic range. For example, in the shot above, there was no way to get details in the sky and details in the wall in front of me, or even in some of the buildings in one image. But by shooting a 3 shot bracket (1 image at -1 Stop, another a +1 Stop and another at normal exposure) you can expose the image for BOTH the highlights and the shadows by combining the images into 1 HDR image.

To be honest, the scene above really wasn't that bad without HDR and i normally look for something with even more dynamic range. Plus, other than the image above, all my HDR is done on a tripod. But as this shows, if you have decent light, you can do it without a tripod.

Yeah. The classic example is an indoor shot that includes a window or door showing a bright outdoor scene. There's no way to get that range into 1 exposure; almost always the outdoor scene is totally washed out. HDR to the rescue, although most times you would need to bracket +/- 2 for such a scene.

[geek-accountant]

I normally do a +/- 2 stops for my HDR, but in this case it really didn't need it which is why I went with the +/- 1 stop. For this shot, the test was could I get a decent HDR image while handholding the camera, which is something I had never tried before (ie, not using a tripod).

[JediTim]

HDR can become addictive. If you don't have HDR software, download Photomatix and you can use their trial version.

Have you compared Photomatix versus the Nik software you bought? I have Photomatic now and am considering getting the Nik software as well.

[ikon]

I normally do a +/- 2 stops for my HDR, but in this case it really didn't need it which is why I went with the +/- 1 stop. For this shot, the test was could I get a decent HDR image while handholding the camera, which is something I had never tried before (ie, not using a tripod).

I'm the opposite; I've only done handheld so far. But then, I haven't done much HDR at all yet.

[geek-accountant]

I'm the opposite; I've only done handheld so far. But then, I haven't done much HDR at all yet.

So the HDR you have done has been handheld or just photos in general are handheld? For me, unless the shutter speeds are going to be lower than I can handhold or I am shooting HDR, I don't normally use a tripod. When shooting sports, I do tend to use a monopod if I am using my 120-300mm f/2.8 lens. But that mainly is because I can't hold the beast for long.

[ikon]

So the HDR you have done has been handheld or just photos in general are handheld? For me, unless the shutter speeds are going to be lower than I can handhold or I am shooting HDR, I don't normally use a tripod. When shooting sports, I do tend to use a monopod if I am using my 120-300mm f/2.8 lens. But that mainly is because I can't hold the beast for long.

90%+ of my shots are handheld, including HDR.

The weight of the f2.8 is mainly why I went with the f4. The price difference didn't hurt either But, I did make sure to go for the IS version.

Edited by ikon, 22 July 2011 - 08:59 PM.